Hacker News Reader

Comment by pestaa | Hacker News Reader

Most of these "libraries" are way less than 1 Kb in size, so why is it a factor so important it must be emphasized this much?

Also the colors make my eyes bleed, so I had to close after a few seconds. Nice dataset, bad presentation.

Also, can JavaScript developers finally learn how to program instead of looking up 0.03 Kb sized "libraries" for every tiny thing. I'm all for code reusability and 3rd party software, but you need to consider the cost of each dependency in your chain. Small utility one-liners rarely worth a full-blown package.

View on HN

I think that's unnecessarily harsh.

I've used this resource before and it's actually a really useful way to figure out which different libraries are out there. Sometimes you only need a minor library for what you're doing and chances are this website help you find it really quickly.

I agree that good js developers should be able to code a lot of this themselves. The vast majority of it I have probably coded over my career, that doesn't mean I want to code it again myself - that's just wasteful. I looked at a few < 0.5kb libraries on that list and there tended to be sufficient code to make at least looking at them worthwhile.

Having said that, I often won't put other people's libraries in because I know I'll probably spend more time dealing with the limitations/assumptions and making css play nice as just doing it myself.

> why is [file size] a factor so important it must be emphasized this much?

Because there is no dead code removal. All of it goes over the wire. Even the stuff you don't use.

If you use a 70kB library, you'll pay 70kB in page weight for it. Even if you only use half of it.

The Closure Compiler can remove unused code if its "advanced mode" is used. However, it requires everything to be annotated and to be written in a particular style. Very few libraries meet these requirements.

Those micro libraries and micro frameworks try to address this issue by doing only one specific thing.

[Personally, I prefer something Dart's built-in dead code removal. I really don't want to think about that stuff. Let me put 30 tween functions into one lib and simply don't ship those functions I'm not using.]

>Also the colors make my eyes bleed, so I had to close after a few seconds.

Special eye illness? If not, then a little over the top reaction...

The biggest problem with just writing some actual JS is a poor compatibility; when you try to generalise some one-liner working in a cutting edge browser you usually end up with a small library, plus the process is pretty painful. Thus those libraries' value mainly lies in research and testing required to make them work rather than in their core function.

Personally I was quite taken with the color scheme, it's soothing to look at.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com