Be Excellent To Each Other

You can't cache script processing, though. I turned my cache on and hit up a random subpage, and it spent more than half a second on Scripting. Again, there was nothing on the page (beside the menu) that I could see that needed anything doing.

I'm going to stop now, because it looks like I'm having a go about your website, and I'm really not. I'm just saying that frameworks aren't efficient for the end user, and their popularity is a big reason as to why an average webpage is so big.

On the other hand, suppose you are going to use 25% of the goodness of one of the big frameworks. Not a crappy bedroom project, but something solidly engineered. You have a choice: use 100% of the framework, or write the 25% yourself. Do you reckon you can write the 25% sufficiently well, on your own, that it's faster than loading 100% of the framework? In the process, will you avoid all the tricky security problems the framework folks have thought about that you've never heard of? Will you be as fast to write patches when new security problems are discovered? When you come to write v2 which needs something in the framework, taking you from 25% to 40%, will it take you months to build out the home-grown version rather than days to integrate some framework call that does the heavy lifting?

There's more factors at play than you're admitting here.

Heh. I was bitching like a sailor about the state of Bradford's road surfaces and then I found out the car had 2 snapped front coil springs.

Not really. What he said is exactly right. Frameworks aren't efficient for the end user, and they contribute to the size of a webpage. Your objection is from the perspective of the site author - which is fine, but not really particularly relevant.

Oh, absolutely, but that's still all stuff that the end user couldn't care less about. I'm just saying all that shit be big.

(Also - yes Also also - frameworks can cause as many problems as they solve, as I'm sure you've found out - mainly when you ask them to do something and they can't, so you have to add it yourself, then maintain it, etc, etc. Don't think I don't use them all the time, though. Libraries, too - I'm trying to wean myself off jQuery because it's fucking awful but I can't help myself)

End users care just as much about how long it takes to write features and security, albeit indirectly. ("Why can't I do X" and "what the fuck you lost my credit card details?")

I think Grim...'s argument is against shit frameworks, rather than frameworks in general. Maybe all JavaScript frameworks are shit. Certainly, hardly any of them appear to be old enough to credibly claim to have matured out of the half-baked-stuff-thrown-on-github stage.

I don't think they do. Remember that the end users aren't people like us

They might care about those things, but they don't give a fuck how you do them.

What's your take on a modular framework then, where you can strip out guff you don't need before downloading?

The same, I guess, but not as bad.

Mind you, who doesn't just tick everything?

Definitely better. But how many devs do strip out the guff? How many know to, especially when they're using a third party component that utilises that framework?

Also relatedly Grim..., what did you use to detect the unused css styles?

I added more in an edit.

They still don't care how those things are done, though.

I don't think it's about shit frameworks. It's about making the right choices.

Take the earlier example of Wordpress (like Grim..., I'm not dissing Wordpress or Wordpress sites - but it's an example of a tool that without competent oversight, is a bloat monster). You can use Wordpress to throw together a highly functional, good looking site in not much time. But if the dev is only looking to do that, and doesn't have the skills/experience/time/budget to get strong performance out of it, chances are it will be loaded with a load of unnecessary guff that hits performance. And there's a lot of devs out there whose prime driver is time to market, and nothing else.

A mess of JavaScript that I bunged into the console.

There's almost certainly plugins that can do the same thing, though.

Here's one:
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/deta ... ikfgnngeik

[edit] Oh, 2 stars out of 5. Maybe not that one, then.

Obviously having the one argument isn't enough, so I'm also going to say that Bootstrap is the fucking Devil, for pretty much the exact same reasons.

Oh ok, fair enough. I use the browser link and web essentials if I'm doing it in Visual Studio for a site, but didn't know of anything that could do it for a published site.

Turns out the Chrome Audit tab does it, too (this page has 87).

If you're interested in performance, I highly recommend getting to grips with Chrome's Timeline and Profiling capabilities, which are complicated but astoundingly powerful.

I've seen the Chrome audit tab, but it only does the current page, which means you have to cross reference every page on the site to find that rule that's only used in one popup three screens deep or something.

Just had a look at the timeline tab. It's a bit like the yslow type analysis, I like it - cheers.

Ah yes, you would indeed. Take a look at this: https://addyosmani.com/blog/removing-unused-css/

They all look to be ones where you have access to the code that controls the site of course. I'm happy with my solution for that*, I just didn't know if you had something whizzy for doing other people's sites. Thanks for the links though, and especially the chrome stuff. Chrome has a lot of nifty stuff built in, and I find myself using it more and more recently.

*Web essentials in Visual Studio in case you missed my earlier post.

Of course it is, it's written in JavaScript. If you lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas.

I'd need access to their code if I wanted to do anything to them, so nope, that's all I have

Bootstrap isn't written in JavaScript. It uses it, like it uses CSS (yes, I know, SCSS really) and HTML.

That reminds me: Web folk - if you've not got to grips with SCSS then get started now and thank me in a couple of hours when you realise how great it is.

Turns out "very soon" is roughly now.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/04/22 ... g_as_doom/

Only the shareware version, though.

Top 50 posters once you remove anyone who hasn't visited this year.

I need to up my game.

And post more.

I want Grim... to implement some kind of API so I can scrape the database and do graphs of people who were most active each month, or who talked about PCs the most over time, or who had the longest gaps between consecutive posts, things like that. It would be the awesome.

Be more specific, and I'll see what I can do.

Things about post contents (ie. "talking about PCs") are unlikely to happen though, because of the large amount of data involved.

That's loser talk. Up your game.

The most important part of requirements gathering is the ability to reject bad requirements.

You're a bad requirement

I'm a typical user. I don't know what I want until you give me the wrong thing.

Well, let's start with this:


`f` can be one of `uid`, `userdeets` and `idandname`.

That's enough for you to use Beex as a login authenticator for other websites. I mean, I wouldn't recommend it, but that's how the calendar, MeatUp and Peex websites work.

So I guess the question is - what other data do you need to get your graphs?

I want inline code styling

Heh, nice one.

I suppose for getting graphs it's more like running queries against the database, such as or or that kind of thing, and then I'd come up with queries depending on what whims I had, like posts as a percentage of totals or compared to other posters and things like that.

Call me insane, but I think allowing queries to be run against the database via an api isn't a smart idea

No inner joins there, very disappointing.

Who needs an API? Just have a text box on a page with ENTER YOUR SQL HERE AND I'LL RUN IT FOR YOU:

Why stop there? I could just exec some PHP, that way you can open up the server with `shell_exec()`.

I wasn't expecting to be where I was in the chart after not posting for three years. I guess it shows how little work I've done in the past.

Well that depends on how well written the API is:

Surely you'd just expose a service and let me pass in a parameter to that service, and then return JSON or XML though, not let me pass in my own SQL.

I think you'd have to consider the quality of the API to be quite high on a scale of "zero" to "oh my holy fuck what were you doing" to allow entire queries to be run.


Well, yes.

Has anyone made a "pull your trousers up!" joke to Trousers yet?

We were waiting for you to do it.

There used to be loads more pictures of DocG.

3 years? Blimey.