+ 1 to François's comments. You're not saying that gzipping and wise pre-fetching and parallel download > of scripts don't improve page load times. Or are you? >
- We already have transfer-encoding in HTTP, and yes, you should definitely use it! - Prefetching is also an important optimization, but in the context of this discussion (bundling), it's an orthogonal concern. > In the equation you paint above something important is missing: the fact > that there's a round-trip delay per request (even with http2.0), and that > the only way to avoid it is to bundle things, as in .zip bundling, to > minimize the (number of requests and thus the) impact of latencies. > With HTTP 1.x (and without sharding) you can fetch up to six resources in parallel. With HTTP 2.0, you can fetch as many resources as you wish in parallel. The only reason bundling exists as an "optimization" is to work around the limit of six parallel requests. The moment you remove that limitation, bundling is unnecessary and only hurts performance. > And there's something else I think .zip bundling can provide that http2.0 > can't: the guarantee that a set of files are cached by the time your script > runs: with such a guarantee you could do synchronous module require()s, à > la node.js. > This is completely orthogonal... if you need to express dependencies between multiple resources, use a loader script, or better.. look into using upcoming promise API's. As I mentioned previously, bundling breaks streaming / incremental execution / prioritization. ig
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
