Hello Andrey, I have not made any measurements of the runtime environment, so I can not objectively compare both approaches. I think if the overhead time of the XMLHttpRequest is insignificant in relation to the load time of the embedded python script and the script is used several times, this approach could be used
Ciao, Jorge El miércoles, 18 de octubre de 2017, 1:06:23 (UTC-4), Andrey Novoseltsev escribió: > > On Tuesday, 17 October 2017 18:56:14 UTC-6, Jorge Manrique wrote: >> >> Hello there >> I found a solution: >> > > Great! > > If the Python script, as in my case, is large it will take some time to >> load >> But I can write it once and use it several times and in different places >> > > Can you please elaborate on this "will take some time to load"? The > largest code you can submit to SMC is 64K, so how getting such a file can > significantly affect the page load time nowadays?.. And do you mean that > there is a difference between this approach and just copy-pasting Sage code > into HTML? > > Thank you! > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-cell" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-cell/ae50d9cc-a385-4f57-8a50-a81168d5e6f9%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
