3 ms·
It sounds like you've done the work to validate the fact that 30Kb is too much for your use case. However, let's be clear here: most people who complain about
by copsarebastards 11y ago
It sounds like you've done the work to validate the fact that 30Kb is too much for your use case.
However, let's be clear here: most people who complain about the size of jQuery are doing so without any basis whatsoever. And even if people are measuring, they may not be measuring the right things. If not using jQuery causes you to reduce your Ajax usage, and reload entire pages as a result instead of only reloading the content, the end result is a slower site.
- bad_user 11y agoI totally agree and I exposed my use-case - really simple interfaces augmented by Javascript and served to mobile phones, so JQuery was basically unneeded, taking it out improved latency and thus it improved conversions. But of course, most people don't measure and most people need the features in JQuery to work reliably and to behave well cross-browser, in which case 30 Kb cached by a CDN is a steal.