Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #28384 > unrolled thread

Smallest JQuery FIles In The World

Started by	Dave Brown <0ntariokingston@gmail.com>
First post	2015-07-13 10:13 -0700
Last post	2015-07-23 08:30 -0700
Articles	10 on this page of 30 — 5 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.javascript

  Smallest JQuery FIles In The World Dave Brown <0ntariokingston@gmail.com> - 2015-07-13 10:13 -0700
    Re: Smallest JQuery FIles In The World "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2015-07-13 16:35 -0700
    Re: Smallest JQuery FIles In The World Dave Brown <0ntariokingston@gmail.com> - 2015-07-13 17:17 -0700
      Re: Smallest JQuery FIles In The World "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2015-07-13 19:48 -0700
    Re: Smallest JQuery FIles In The World Dave Brown <0ntariokingston@gmail.com> - 2015-07-13 17:23 -0700
      Re: Smallest JQuery FIles In The World "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2015-07-13 19:54 -0700
    Re: Smallest JQuery FIles In The World Dave Brown <0ntariokingston@gmail.com> - 2015-07-13 17:25 -0700
    Re: Smallest JQuery FIles In The World Dave Brown <0ntariokingston@gmail.com> - 2015-07-13 19:54 -0700
    Re: Smallest JQuery FIles In The World Dave Brown <0ntariokingston@gmail.com> - 2015-07-13 19:58 -0700
      Re: Smallest JQuery FIles In The World "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2015-07-13 20:11 -0700
        Re: Smallest JQuery FIles In The World Dave Brown <0ntariokingston@gmail.com> - 2015-07-13 20:14 -0700
        Re: Smallest JQuery FIles In The World Dave Brown <0ntariokingston@gmail.com> - 2015-07-13 20:39 -0700
          Re: Smallest JQuery FIles In The World "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2015-07-13 20:49 -0700
    Re: Smallest JQuery FIles In The World Dave Brown <0ntariokingston@gmail.com> - 2015-07-13 20:01 -0700
    Re: Smallest JQuery FIles In The World Dave Brown <0ntariokingston@gmail.com> - 2015-07-13 21:15 -0700
      Re: Smallest JQuery FIles In The World "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2015-07-13 22:40 -0700
    Re: Smallest JQuery FIles In The World Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2015-07-14 09:12 +0200
      Re: Smallest JQuery FIles In The World Erwin Moller <erwinmollerusenet@xs4all.nl> - 2015-07-15 12:56 +0200
    Re: Smallest JQuery FIles In The World Dave Brown <0ntariokingston@gmail.com> - 2015-07-14 00:46 -0700
    Re: Smallest JQuery FIles In The World Dave Brown <0ntariokingston@gmail.com> - 2015-07-14 00:48 -0700
    Re: Smallest JQuery FIles In The World Dave Brown <0ntariokingston@gmail.com> - 2015-07-14 01:00 -0700
    Re: Smallest JQuery FIles In The World Dave Brown <0ntariokingston@gmail.com> - 2015-07-14 02:46 -0700
    Re: Smallest JQuery FIles In The World Dave Brown <0ntariokingston@gmail.com> - 2015-07-15 19:09 -0700
      Re: Smallest JQuery FIles In The World Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-16 12:30 +1000
        Re: Smallest JQuery FIles In The World Dave Brown <0ntariokingston@gmail.com> - 2015-07-17 10:54 -0700
      Re: Smallest JQuery FIles In The World Erwin Moller <erwinmollerusenet@xs4all.nl> - 2015-07-16 11:28 +0200
      Re: Smallest JQuery FIles In The World Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2015-07-16 14:42 +0200
    Re: Smallest JQuery FIles In The World Dave Brown <0ntariokingston@gmail.com> - 2015-07-17 10:24 -0700
      Re: Smallest JQuery FIles In The World "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2015-07-18 13:38 -0700
    Re: Smallest JQuery FIles In The World Dave Brown <0ntariokingston@gmail.com> - 2015-07-23 08:30 -0700

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#28407

From	Dave Brown <0ntariokingston@gmail.com>
Date	2015-07-14 01:00 -0700
Message-ID	<8c34689a-766f-41bc-824a-ba801d7eb5b6@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#28384

Michael Huffer, the only solution I need is how to rid of pests like you. I never asked for solutions, I already have the smallest JQuery files on the planet Earth, so get over it.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#28409

From	Dave Brown <0ntariokingston@gmail.com>
Date	2015-07-14 02:46 -0700
Message-ID	<d5949ae5-e909-4b2f-a6ff-141c32b3593c@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#28384

Here is a demo of www.whak.ca/packer/PNG.htm that I mentioned: http://jsfiddle.net/6px7yru0/show/ It's a real PNG image compressor from a compiled C++ programmed application converted using Emscripten to bytecode/Web Assembly. At first it was 2.8 MB, but I compressed it for client side (built in decompressor) to 614 KB, gzip gets 590KB, so it's pretty damn close!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#28439

From	Dave Brown <0ntariokingston@gmail.com>
Date	2015-07-15 19:09 -0700
Message-ID	<158ceeb2-9f2a-4526-b565-d41032225d62@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#28384

Erwin, his post had nothing to to with anything. I guess not making any JavaScript code or even a web page would use least data usage, just leave the computer off might even save more bytes.

http://www.whak.ca/packer/JavaScript.htm added LZMA compression today :)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#28440

From	Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com>
Date	2015-07-16 12:30 +1000
Message-ID	<s6WdndNvP8GrijrInZ2dnUU7-L2dnZ2d@westnet.com.au>
In reply to	#28439

On 16/07/2015 12:09 PM, Dave Brown wrote:
> Erwin, his post had nothing to to with anything. I guess not making
> any JavaScript code or even a web page would use least data usage,
> just leave the computer off might even save more bytes.
>
> http://www.whak.ca/packer/JavaScript.htm added LZMA compression today
> :)

Besides (I'm guessing) you, is there anyone, anywhere that's using it on 
a "production" web site?

Andrew Poulos

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#28448

From	Dave Brown <0ntariokingston@gmail.com>
Date	2015-07-17 10:54 -0700
Message-ID	<4dd77295-17c4-4d71-b3d5-a7f4f5cff510@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#28440

On Wednesday, July 15, 2015 at 10:30:21 PM UTC-4, Andrew Poulos wrote:
> On 16/07/2015 12:09 PM, Dave Brown wrote:
> > Erwin, his post had nothing to to with anything. I guess not making
> > any JavaScript code or even a web page would use least data usage,
> > just leave the computer off might even save more bytes.
> >
> > http://www.whak.ca/packer/JavaScript.htm added LZMA compression today
> > :)
> 
> Besides (I'm guessing) you, is there anyone, anywhere that's using it on 
> a "production" web site?
> 
> Andrew Poulos

I refuse to use JQuery, I am a programmer, I use JavaScript. Sorry, Andrew, I do not keep tabs on every website in the world to give you an answer. I made them about an hour before I posted here, they were all test and working.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#28441

From	Erwin Moller <erwinmollerusenet@xs4all.nl>
Date	2015-07-16 11:28 +0200
Message-ID	<55a77923$0$2895$e4fe514c@news2.news.xs4all.nl>
In reply to	#28439

On 7/16/2015 4:09 AM, Dave Brown wrote:
> Erwin, his post had nothing to to with anything. I guess not making any JavaScript code or even a web page would use least data usage, just leave the computer off might even save more bytes.
>
> http://www.whak.ca/packer/JavaScript.htm added LZMA compression today :)
>

Dear spammer,

Please learn to reply to the poster.

Erwin Moller


-- 
"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without 
evidence."
-- Christopher Hitchens

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#28442

From	Silvio <silvio@internet.com>
Date	2015-07-16 14:42 +0200
Message-ID	<55a7a6a8$0$2898$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>
In reply to	#28439

On 07/16/2015 04:09 AM, Dave Brown wrote:
> Erwin, his post had nothing to to with anything. I guess not making any JavaScript code or even a web page would use least data usage, just leave the computer off might even save more bytes.
>
> http://www.whak.ca/packer/JavaScript.htm added LZMA compression today :)
>

Your reply seems to be misplaced.

But you are wrong. It is my business to make web pages and I do use 
JavaScript with that (watch out or Thomas will chastise us for using the 
moniker).

I am just saying that I see no need for jQuery at all since it does 
absolutely nothing that can't be done just as easily, mostly less 
verbose and always less obscure by plain DOM manipulation and CSS.

Except that it adds a dependency and a lot of overhead in both space and 
time.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#28447

From	Dave Brown <0ntariokingston@gmail.com>
Date	2015-07-17 10:24 -0700
Message-ID	<dbba4015-b7c6-4a2d-b204-63c2810e3374@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#28384

www.erwin-moller.is-a-jerk.com
I better spam something then eh...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#28451

From	"Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com>
Date	2015-07-18 13:38 -0700
Message-ID	<550da84f-4dec-4466-bb09-fcad7effc5cb@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#28447

On Friday, July 17, 2015 at 12:24:44 PM UTC-5, Dave Brown wrote:
> www.erwin-moller.is-a-jerk.com
> I better spam something then eh...

The mistake that Erwin, Silvio, Andrew, and I have made in this thread is to indulge in what George Bernard Shaw warned us about:

"Never wrestle with pigs. You both get dirty and the pig likes it."

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#28463

From	Dave Brown <0ntariokingston@gmail.com>
Date	2015-07-23 08:30 -0700
Message-ID	<90271cad-d141-46d3-8e52-b68fcad81f54@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#28384

LZMA client side compression now possible on http://www.whak.ca/packer/LZMA.htm

Michael, only mistake you made was telling me to use gzip and your way that is not client side self extracting.

Besides, http://www.whak.ca/packer/JavaScript.htm has gzip compression for client side, matter of choosing

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

csiph-web

Smallest JQuery FIles In The World

Contents

#28407

#28409

#28439

#28440

#28448

#28441

#28442

#28447

#28451

#28463