Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Delivering WordPress in 7kb

css-tricks.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–59 of 59 posts

Re: Delivering WordPress in 7kb

#51

Post by keithpeter »

codesections wrote: post #33

I think this is the wrong way to go about site minimalism. My personal site[0] is pretty minimalist--the home page has one request for 3.3 KB. But it doesn't sacrifice in the same ways this site does: it keeps readable source code, it still uses BEM classes for maintainability, and it has a working menu on the same page (rather than requiring visitors to load a seperate menu page). So, with less than half the kilobyt…

"The Nobel-prize-winning physicist Richard Feynman wrote about his early childhood experience repairing transistor radios in the 1930s."

They would not be transistor radios in the 1930s. Battery radios had valves/tubes in them and two kinds of battery. The picture is a very late 1950s/early 60s transistor radio.

Nice site, interesting content, have you ever come across the British judge Lord Denning? He was a mathematician to begin with then turned to law having decided that teaching was boring.

Re: Delivering WordPress in 7kb

#52

Post by apeschar »

blattimwind wrote: post #46
apeschar wrote: post #25

Reducing the amount of requests and roundtrips required to render the page, and reducing the latency on those requests is key. For example, you use Google Fonts. For that you need to load CSS. So that's three roundtrips for rendering your page: 1) your page, 2) the Google Fonts CSS, 3) the font files. We've build a WordPress plugin called PhastPress (fast press) that helps you reduce the request count and those round…

> three roundtrips Well, before we get to the Google Fonts CSS, we first have to open another connection there, do a TLS handshake, and maybe we even need to look that host up first before any of that.

True. I got the roundtrip terminology from Google's PageSpeed Insights tool, which AFAIK does not count the actual network roundtrips.

The one "logical" roundtrip (an additional request) would indeed count for many if you consider DNS, TCP and TLS handshakes.

Even more of a reason to get rid of them.

Re: Delivering WordPress in 7kb

#56

Post by jjeaff »

thesumofall wrote: post #44
jazoom wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. You can use replace() instead of push(). But there are other issues like bookmarking or sharing the page with the menu open. People won't expect the result. It's really not difficult to create an on-page menu so this seems more trouble than it's worth.

But would people really try to share / bookmark a page that at that very moment doesn't show the content they want to share? I think it is a beautiful, simple solution that just works (and also did work perfectly in the past when we didn't have JS)

Yes. If you have ever worked on a site with lots of users, you will find that if there is a way to break something, someone will absolutely do that thing. It might not be super often, but it will definitely happen.

Re: Delivering WordPress in 7kb

#57

Post by jjeaff »

codesections wrote: post #33

I think this is the wrong way to go about site minimalism. My personal site[0] is pretty minimalist--the home page has one request for 3.3 KB. But it doesn't sacrifice in the same ways this site does: it keeps readable source code, it still uses BEM classes for maintainability, and it has a working menu on the same page (rather than requiring visitors to load a seperate menu page). So, with less than half the kilobyt…

There are lots of WordPress plugins that generate and cache static pages. As for keeping code readable, if you are using a generator to create a static page, why wouldn't you minimize upon generation?

You of course keep your code readable internally, but what your users get should be minimized and as small as possible, unless your users are there to peak at the source code.

Post reply on HN