Just as an update on this thread, it looks like they've been working on build size and I'm currently able to create a 23kb file for dojo..So, I hope that will speed things up a little bit.
On 8/5/06, Beat Hoermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Jesse Kuhnert <jkuhnert <at> gmail.com> writes: > You should find that no XmlHttpObject's will be created against your will > unless you specifically set a parameter or call a method that is designed to > do it. (whether directly or as a side effect). Good idea! > The framework does continue to include javascript in your pages, as it has > always done. Of course, I guess nobody wants to miss that! It is just a difference to load a few inline JS-snippets of 50 Bytes or a JS-file of 173 KByte. > The summary between that documented page, and another email written on this > list - is that your thoughts are valid/common, but until someone presents me > with a real "problem" that I can measure and test against I'm not going to > invest the time/effort it would require to write the API around unknown > object environments. Do you mean the portlet thread? Here again: The guy doesn't need the 173 KByte "dojo.js". He just turns it off (or later it won't be automatically loaded anymore). I don't quite understand what you mean with "a real problem" and "unknown object environments". I do not have a concrete setting. Intuitively the new "EventListener" and the new "ResponseBuilder" fit. Eventually, I would like to use them for simple XHR-communication (aka ajax) without being forced to load the dojo-infrastructure. I don't know if this can be accomplished or how Tapestry generally supports me doing XHR without writing dynamic scripts and without using dojo. Sure, you guys have already done a lot of conceptional work on this and it is not a problem for me to wait for a refreshed user doc. My current point is: It is not clear to me why a thin web-app has to load the dojo-infrastructure if it doesn't need dojo. (I showed an example in the response to Bernard.) > I would certainly be all for reducing the total compressed size of the > initial dojo bootstrap file though. No argument here for that :) Some of it > would involve simply including less packages in the default build, some of > it involving other things I've been mulling over in my head for a while. Not of a concern to me: Dojo provides so many valuable things for a web-app, all rectifying the additional loading time. My concern: How can I rectify a 10 sec startup-time for a web-app that doesn't use dojo. Thank's for your answer! It is a pleasure for me to see how things evolve around Tapestry and XHR! --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Jesse Kuhnert Tapestry/Dojo/(and a dash of TestNG), team member/developer Open source based consulting work centered around dojo/tapestry/tacos/hivemind.
