400K of JS on the wire? For a largely-static `.gov` site? I smell a framework! https://www.webpagetest.org/result/180912_6Q_5fd08e0ef64071de6f3cd266c36a3cac/1/breakdown/ …
-
Show this thread
-
US Veterans, as a whole, are not a wealthy group. They are as likely to be at risk for homelessness as to be able to afford the best hardware: http://nchv.org/index.php/news/media/background_and_statistics/ …
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likesShow this thread -
There's a little good news on this front, but it doesn't change the overall picture about technology access:https://endhomelessness.org/resource/veteran-homelessness/ …
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likesShow this thread -
What are those 400K providing our veterans and their loved ones? Drop-down menus, AFAICT. And a type-ahead search. Also React, React DOM, Promise and Object.assign polyfills (in browsers that have both natively), Modernizr, a copy of `core-js`, etc. etc. etc.
4 replies 1 retweet 10 likesShow this thread -
And that's just the vendor file!: https://www.vets.gov/generated/vendor.entry.574d7c1b8a175484ffb9-1536687772278.js …
1 reply 0 retweets 1 likeShow this thread -
Because this is in the now-traditional style of cultural-React-inspired DIY-bloat (everything's pluggable, which means an exercise to the reader), the app bundle includes Proptypes, what *looks* like a full copy of Lodash, and oh so very much more.
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likesShow this thread -
The net result is to push TTI in this trace back nearly 4 full seconds: https://www.webpagetest.org/video/compare.php?tests=180912_6Q_5fd08e0ef64071de6f3cd266c36a3cac-r:1-c:0 …
1 reply 0 retweets 1 likeShow this thread -
There's a lot going on deeper in this app, it seems: https://github.com/department-of-veterans-affairs/vets-website/tree/master/content/pages … But why is the front-page paying for that? Why are our vets and their loved ones being slowed down in accessing essential services this way?
3 replies 0 retweets 6 likesShow this thread -
If there's something that *doesn't* need React, it's a drop-down menu. The sport of pure-CSS drop-downs was won more than a decade ago. There's no excuse.
5 replies 4 retweets 34 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @slightlylate
If I look at the source (in Sources pane) then what I'm seeing seems related to authentication, forms, making claims, etc. So if anything I think the goal was to make the logged-in experience have less latency from page reloads. Of course should’ve been code split from main page.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
"less latency from page reloads" would be preloading cacheable assets at low priority (e.g., a <link rel="preload"> or a SW install phase), not running code on pages that don't use them.
-
-
Replying to @slightlylate
Would your experience of using Twitter improve if Twitter reloaded the page on every click? That seems to be your suggestion. I understand you re: static pages not needing React perfectly well. I agree with it. But clearly the developers didn’t use React “for a dropdown”.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @dan_abramov @slightlylate
My point is that React was used for a dynamic part that seems to appear when you sign in. It would be better to not load that part until you actually do — and there’s nothing stopping them from implementing this with React.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes - 7 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
& Web Standards TL; Blink API OWNER
Named PWAs w/
DMs open. Tweets my own; press@google.com for official comms.