Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #20079
| Message-ID | <1817999.HuHCsYxAM7@PointedEars.de> (permalink) |
|---|---|
| From | Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> |
| Organization | PointedEars Software (PES) |
| Date | 2013-05-31 21:38 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: !0 versus true |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.javascript |
| References | <gMWdnU1mmO68hwPMnZ2dnUVZ_sqdnZ2d@westnet.com.au> <83a18ed4-21be-4444-b844-0b422531766c@googlegroups.com> |
imma harper wrote: > I feel it worth noting here that code that processes the source of other > functions is not relevant to minification as it can be constructed to > break under any and all code changes. Arguing about it's relevance does > not help the initial post. ACK. That is what I thought of Scott's argument, along the lines of “red herring” or even “strawman argument”. > On topic: !0 vs true is a size-vs-speed issue, as they resolve to exactly > the same If the code is executed millions of times, it's likely not worth > the download speed change (although it could be worth testing, if it's > that major an issue) Yes, I think we have already agreed on that. > but it could still be worth the bandwidth costs If the code is almost > never executed (under average use - ie it covers an unusual edge case) > then clearly saving the download speed and bandwidth would be worth it > assuming you don't need to debug client-side ;-) I do not follow. If the code is almost never executed, and it covers an unusual edge case, then there would be few occurrences of it and the amount of space saved to replace few “true” with “!0” would be negligibly small. Also, I am puzzled by your reference to unnecessary “client-side debugging” – where else would you debug code that runs in a browser? Are you just joking after all? You have posted out of thread, without quoting, and with lines that are 241 characters long. Please do not use Google Groups for posting if you cannot work around its bugs. TIA. <http://jibbering.com/faq/#posting> <http://PointedEars.de/faq#posting> <FAQENTRY> Perhaps a subsection about the problems caused by posting via Google Groups should be added? </FAQENTRY> -- PointedEars Twitter: @PointedEars2 Please do not Cc: me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.
Back to comp.lang.javascript | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
!0 versus true Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2013-05-23 23:31 +1000
Re: !0 versus true Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2013-05-23 07:58 -0700
Re: !0 versus true Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-23 17:53 +0200
Re: !0 versus true Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2013-05-24 12:17 -0700
Re: !0 versus true Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-24 21:56 +0200
Re: !0 versus true Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2013-05-24 13:13 -0700
Re: !0 versus true Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-24 22:23 +0200
Re: !0 versus true Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2013-05-24 22:08 +0000
Re: !0 versus true Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-25 07:00 +0200
Re: !0 versus true Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2013-05-25 20:04 -0700
Re: !0 versus true "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2013-05-26 11:07 +0200
Re: !0 versus true Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-26 13:11 +0200
Re: !0 versus true Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2013-05-26 13:28 -0700
Re: !0 versus true Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-27 12:07 +0200
Re: !0 versus true Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2013-05-27 11:27 -0700
Re: !0 versus true Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-27 23:30 +0200
Re: !0 versus true Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2013-05-27 17:12 -0700
Re: !0 versus true Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-28 02:40 +0200
Re: !0 versus true Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2013-05-27 20:29 -0700
Re: !0 versus true John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2013-05-28 15:38 +0100
Re: !0 versus true Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2013-05-28 08:32 -0700
Re: !0 versus true Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-28 21:14 +0200
Re: !0 versus true Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2013-05-28 15:38 -0700
Re: !0 versus true Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-29 13:20 +0200
Re: !0 versus true Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2013-05-29 06:37 -0700
Re: !0 versus true Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-29 16:28 +0200
Re: !0 versus true Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2013-05-29 13:32 -0700
Re: !0 versus true Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-29 23:34 +0200
Re: !0 versus true Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2013-05-30 06:30 -0700
Re: !0 versus true John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2013-05-29 17:33 +0100
Re: !0 versus true Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2013-05-29 11:34 -0700
Re: !0 versus true John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2013-05-31 10:22 +0100
Re: !0 versus true Christoph Becker <cmbecker69@gmx.de> - 2013-05-31 13:04 +0200
Re: !0 versus true Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-31 18:13 +0200
Re: !0 versus true Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-31 18:16 +0200
Re: !0 versus true Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2013-05-31 07:25 -0700
Re: !0 versus true imma harper <immaterial_uk@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-05-31 09:46 -0700
Re: !0 versus true Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-31 21:38 +0200
Re: !0 versus true John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2013-06-01 17:37 +0100
Re: !0 versus true Dr J R Stockton <reply1300@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2013-06-02 21:03 +0100
Re: !0 versus true Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2013-06-03 04:45 -0700
Re: !0 versus true Dr J R Stockton <reply1300@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2013-06-04 17:23 +0100
csiph-web