Kevin Dangoor wrote: >> However, I'm not sure of the net benefit of this... surely total page >> size will drop, but I've seen many places that recommend joining all >> JS (and CSS) into a single file for lower load on the server... I >> guess a "mochikit_full" will keep everyone happy :) > > That's true. From the tests I've been reading lately, making fewer > requests to the server has a bigger impact on the client-side > performance than most anything else. If you're looking for more than > just a couple of functions from MochiKit, having one JavaScript file > speeds things up considerably over having several.
In this case, it might be a useful optimization to create a widget that you can pass a list of JavaScript files and when its inserted into a template, it will generate a single static file to minimize server traffic. You could even have it generate a cached version that gets run through a JavaScript packing tool. Seems an interesting idea, at least... -- Jonathan LaCour http://cleverdevil.org --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TurboGears Trunk" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/turbogears-trunk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
