Show HN: Online web tools to get your work done faster

Post by greglindahl » Mon, Feb 05, 2018, 4:29 AM UTC

chrismorgan wrote: post #20

What is the HTML compressor using? It’s missing quite a few opportunities. Take this input HTML: This is a title Well. I wonder… It produces this output: This is a title Well. I wonder… It converted “doctype” to uppercase (equivalent, but bad for compression). It didn’t strip and as superfluous. It didn’t remove unnecessary quotes around attribute values. It didn’t remove the unnecessary closing tags. Here’s what I s…

Post by Tomte » Mon, Feb 05, 2018, 4:33 AM UTC

greglindahl wrote: post #21

chrismorgan wrote: post #20

What is the HTML compressor using? It’s missing quite a few opportunities. Take this input HTML: This is a title Well. I wonder… It produces this output: This is a title Well. I wonder… It converted “doctype” to uppercase (equivalent, but bad for compression). It didn’t strip and as superfluous. It didn’t remove unnecessary quotes around attribute values. It didn’t remove the unnecessary closing tags. Here’s what I s…

Uh, yeah. Now that we have rules for parsing broken webpages, let's intentionally break our webpages.

Post by flukus » Mon, Feb 05, 2018, 4:47 AM UTC

headcanon wrote: post #14

I'm curious, who here has a development workflow such that compressing/minifying code via an ad-hoc web tool makes sense? I've always just included it as part of a build process, or at the very least would pipe it into uglifyjs command line. I'm sure everyone's got their own needs but I just don't understand how that would be useful.

Post by reificator » Mon, Feb 05, 2018, 5:26 AM UTC

themodelplumber wrote: post #22

headcanon wrote: post #14

I'm curious, who here has a development workflow such that compressing/minifying code via an ad-hoc web tool makes sense? I've always just included it as part of a build process, or at the very least would pipe it into uglifyjs command line. I'm sure everyone's got their own needs but I just don't understand how that would be useful.

You're touching up an old website for your old client and have just a few minutes to...ah, I wonder if there's a quick minimizer out there somewhere? That might be fun to try, and we did just add a bit more overhead to the site. I haven't done this exact thing, but I've done similar things many times. Not every project has or should have a build process. And unfortunately not all of them even have a command line...

Post by Mandatum » Mon, Feb 05, 2018, 6:15 AM UTC

reificator wrote: post #27

themodelplumber wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're touching up an old website for your old client and have just a few minutes to...ah, I wonder if there's a quick minimizer out there somewhere? That might be fun to try, and we did just add a bit more overhead to the site. I haven't done this exact thing, but I've done similar things many times. Not every project has or should have a build process. And unfortunately not all of them even have a command line...

If you don't have an established build process, I would consider a one-time minification of an established codebase to be a pretty poor decision. Either setup a trivial build script, or don't do it at all. EDIT: Clearly HN disagrees with me. Tell me, what does being a cowboy get you here? If it's a measurable performance boost, then as soon as you patch it again your site will seem slower. Unless you then manually mi…