I have a question to ask regarding the load time of the spectrum browser
(it's really fast) when compared to the demo spectrum app I deployed
online. I will ask my question on another thread shortly.

On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 1:34 PM Harbs <[email protected]> wrote:

> Reaction was positive. Not sure I convinced anyone to switch, but the more
> word gets out, the better…
>
> I added some comments to give a better picture of performance gains. Not
> sure why it’s not showing up.
>
> Here’s what I added:
>
> I did not do a very good demonstrating the performance benefits of Roylae
> in the talk. I put some better numbers together:
>
> *Minimal app*
> js 17KB gzipped
> html 444 bytes unzipped
> html 270 bytes gzipped
> css ... depends on what you put there
> load times:
> 95 ms document load event
> 100 ms onload event
> 109 ms for FP, FCP and LCP
>
> So we’re talking less than 20KB of data TOTAL and about 100ms load time
> for a simple app.
>
> *Spectrum Browser*
> js 204 KB gzipped
> html 5,632 bytes unzipped
> html 863 bytes gzipped (with references to 64 external css files)
> load times
> 275 ms FP FCP
> 281 ms doc load
> 330 ms LCP
> 343 ms onload
>
> This *easily* beats Google’s optimal load times of less than 1/2 second.
> In fact you need to try VERY HARD to build a Royale app which takes longer
> than 1/2 second to load.
>
> Here’s a breakdown of the load time of the Spectrum Browser:
> The bulk of the load time is due to the loading of Adobe’s Spectrum CSS.
> Some of things I’d like to do is add a Semantic-UI component set and create
> a tutorial on using Tailwind CSS with Royale. A build process which
> generates optimized external CSS would do wonders for load times...
>
> The first 159 ms was evaluating css files. I’m loading 64 css files from
> Adobe, so that takes time. If I cared, this can probably be optimized a lot.
>
> Evaluating and building html dom tree took 94 ms. Of that, evaluating the
> script took 65 ms. Not sure why that took so long.
>
> The actual running of the code which builds the DOM took 27 ms.
>
> Recalculate style took 20 ms. If I decided that was too long, I could
> delay loading some of the content pretty easily which would speed this up.
>
> All in all, I don’t feel that a 204KB js file (with zero other
> dependencies) and a 300-350 ms load time is something that needs further
> optimization. If I did, Royale supports modules. I could probably use
> modules to cut down the JS size and the load times to less than half. Not
> worth it IMO.
>
> Like I mentioned in the talk, switching routes generally takes about 20ms.
> That’s about a frame rate of about 60 fps to switch routes. That’s insanely
> fast if you stop to think about it...
>
> I hope that does a better job of demonstrating the performance benefits of
> Royale.
>
> On Jan 26, 2022, at 9:11 AM, Yishay Weiss <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Nice presentation. Too bad there wasn’t a Q&A. What was the reaction?
>
> *From: *Harbs <[email protected]>
> *Sent: *Tuesday, January 25, 2022 1:57 PM
> *To: *[email protected]
> *Subject: *Talk on Royale
>
>
> I recently gave a talk on Royale to a local group in Jerusalem. Please
> excuse the poor delivery. I was recovering from Covid and a flu. ;-)
>
> I went a bit into strands, beads and performance.
>
> I used the router classes as an example of MXML and Royale features.
>
> It might be of interest. There will be some colloquial terms you might not
> recognize, but it should all be understandable...
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QWGISrmN4to
>
>
>

Reply via email to