You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I didn't know where to post this (which is part of the point I'm trying to make here), so I just posted it in what I think is the most important Ampersand module.
Using webpack or browserify is useful (and temporary) but it have one major drawback: bundle size.
Thus, Ampersand documentation does not even give numbers about the size of each ampersand module (thing we are accustomed to with js libraries).
Backbone weights 7.6kb, packed and gzipped.
Using ampersand-model and ampersand-view with browserify (which made smaller bundle, it seems) give 100kb, packed and gzipped.
10 times the size for a modular approach is a big price to pay (collection and router have to be added for a proper comparison). Can something be done about this?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I didn't know where to post this (which is part of the point I'm trying to make here), so I just posted it in what I think is the most important Ampersand module.
Using
webpack
orbrowserify
is useful (and temporary) but it have one major drawback: bundle size.Thus, Ampersand documentation does not even give numbers about the size of each ampersand module (thing we are accustomed to with js libraries).
Backbone weights 7.6kb, packed and gzipped.
Using
ampersand-model
andampersand-view
withbrowserify
(which made smaller bundle, it seems) give 100kb, packed and gzipped.10 times the size for a modular approach is a big price to pay (collection and router have to be added for a proper comparison). Can something be done about this?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: