Am 23.04.2016 um 11:34 schrieb Alexander Kjeldaas:

On Sat, Apr 23, 2016 at 10:52 AM, Joachim Durchholz wrote:

...

Finally, any interface libraries that will have to be downloaded from web pages should be small. Less than 100k. Page bloat is a real and serious problem.

IMO, this particular thing is not a serious problem, and the web pages can easily handle two orders of magnitude larger web pages, 10MB javascript without problems (example: Google+).

Well, that's far too much. You have people on UMTS, you have people in countries with low wired network bandwidth, and these are all locked out if every single page needs a download of 10 MB. BTW the average web page size is about the same as the Doom install image: https://mobiforge.com/research-analysis/the-web-is-doom That's just ridiculous.

If part of the download is a standard library, then we'll see more use of cache forever semantics from standardized locations (CDNs).

Cache-forever does not happen in practice. Stuff gets upgraded, stuff gets evicted from caches. Particularly if you're entering at the bottom of the Alexa rankings, you can't rely on that to fix the problems for you.

The stackage eco-system with pre-compiled packages can be directly mapped onto a cache forever system and with async download of new versions (like what Chrome and other browsers do today), the problem is mostly converted from a latency issue into a bandwidth issue, and we have plenty of bandwidth.

You have. I have. Our users do not have. Also, large libraries tend to be slow - it's not a 1:1 correlation, but it is statistically significant. So if you try to keep code size under control, that's usually a net win. BTW there's also a latency issue: Larger libraries tend to load slower, particularly if the user's persistent storage isn't an SSD but spinning-rust technology. 10 MB is latency even if it's not being downloaded. The prevalence of reactions like yours is what has been making web slowness part of the problem. 10 years ago, I could open dozens of web pages in my browser, and things would be snappy; today, with a machine that's ten times as powerful, the browser gets bogged down at a mere dozen webpages open in tabs. This isn't going to become better, Webassembly or not. Regards, Jo

Joachim Durchholz writes:

...

IMO, this particular thing is not a serious problem, and the web pages can easily handle two orders of magnitude larger web pages, 10MB javascript without problems (example: Google+).

Well, that's far too much. You have people on UMTS, you have people in countries with low wired network bandwidth, and these are all locked out if every single page needs a download of 10 MB.

BTW the average web page size is about the same as the Doom install image: https://mobiforge.com/research-analysis/the-web-is-doom That's just ridiculous.

This almost sounds like an attempt to assign morality to program size. It doesn't seem evident that there is any notion of morality in how we, collectively, as humanity, seem to reach for tools of expression -- indeed, it trumps morality. Personal preferences aside, every time that someone finds out a way to be perceivable more expressive, you can count on that an X% increase in size will be gladly, indeed gleefully, accepted. This is outside of our control. All we can do is offer a tool, among many others.

The prevalence of reactions like yours is what has been making web slowness part of the problem. 10 years ago, I could open dozens of web pages in my browser, and things would be snappy; today, with a machine that's ten times as powerful, the browser gets bogged down at a mere dozen webpages open in tabs. This isn't going to become better, Webassembly or not.

... -- с уважениeм / respectfully, Косырев Сергей