lit
compression-dictionary-transport | lit | |
---|---|---|
7 | 141 | |
90 | 17,575 | |
- | 1.3% | |
5.2 | 9.4 | |
2 months ago | 11 days ago | |
TypeScript | ||
GNU General Public License v3.0 or later | BSD 3-clause "New" or "Revised" License |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
compression-dictionary-transport
-
Compression efficiency with shared dictionaries in Chrome
> Dictionary entries (or at least the metadata) should be cleared any time cookies are cleared.
So it seems it should not get you anything you cannot already do with cookies.
https://github.com/WICG/compression-dictionary-transport?tab...
-
Chrome feature: Compression dictionary transport with Shared Brotli
Talked about here:
https://github.com/WICG/compression-dictionary-transport
- Compression Dictionary Transport
-
Improving compression with a preset DEFLATE dictionary (2015)
There's a spec up for custom dictionary support across the web. https://github.com/WICG/compression-dictionary-transport
This was one of the major blockers that iirc Mozilla threw in the way of zstd compression support: they said zstd with a standardly accepted dictionary would be too particular & wanted more. With this spec maybe Moz will accept zstd as a web compression standard.
-
JavaScript import maps are now supported cross-browser
Here here. Today, bundlers may get you to first page load faster. But if a user comes back and you've shipped two small fixes, all those extra wins you get from compressing a bunch files at once fly out the window & you're deep in the red. If you have users that return to your site, and your site is actively developed, bundling is probably a bad tradeoff.
We see similar fixedness in the field all over the place: people freaking love small Docker image sizes & will spend forever making it smaller. But my gosh the number of engineers I've seen fixate on total download size for an image, & ignore everything else, is vast. Same story, but server side: my interest is in the download size for what v1.0.1 of the Docker container looks like once we already have v1.0.0 already shipped. Once we start to consider what the ongoing experience is, rather than just the first time easy-to-judge metric, the pictures all look very different.
Then there's the other thing. The performance reasons for bundling are being eaten away. Preload & Early Hints are both here today & both offer really good tools to greatly streamline asset loading & claw back a lot of turf, and work hand-in-glove with import-maps. The remaining thing everyone points out is that a large bundle compresses better (but again at the cost of making incremental updates bad). The spec is in progress, but compression-dictionary-transport could potentially obliterate that advantage, either make it a non-factor, or perhaps even a disadvantage for large bundles (as one could use a set of dictionaries & go discover which of your handful of dictionaries best compress the code). These dictionaries would again be first-load hit, but could then be used again and again by users, to great effect again for incremental changes. https://github.com/WICG/compression-dictionary-transport
Bundles are such an ugly stain on the web, such an awful hack that betrays the web's better resourceful nature. Thankfully we're finally making real strides against this opaque awful blob we've foisted upon this world. And we can start to undo not just the ugliness, but the terrible performance pains we've created by bundling so much togther.
lit
-
I've created yet another JavaScript framework
That is the reason why I experiment with the TiniJS framework for a while. It is a collection of tools for developing web/desktop/mobile apps using the native Web Component technology, based on the Lit library. Thank you the Lit team for creating a great tool assists us working with standard Web Component easier.
- Web Components e a minha opinião sobre o futuro das libs front-end
-
Show HN: I made a Pinterest clone using SigLIP image embeddings
https://github.com/lit/lit/tree/main/packages/labs/virtualiz...
-
What We Need Instead of "Web Components"
actually, looking at it (https://lit.dev/), i do exactly that.
I also define a `render()` and extend my own parent, which does a `replaceChildren()` with the render. And, strangely, I also call the processor `html`
I'll still stick with mine however, my 'framework' is half-page of code. I dislike dependencies greatly. I'd need to be saving thousand+ lines at least.
Here, I don't want a build system to make a website; that's mad. So I don't want lit. I want the 5 lines it takes to invoke a dom parser, and the 5 lines it takes do define a webcomp parent.
-
Web Components Aren't Framework Components
I rather like https://lit.dev/ for web components so far.
For the reactivity stuff, you might want to read https://frontendmasters.com/blog/vanilla-javascript-reactivi... - it shows a bunch of no-library-required patterns that, while in a number of cases I'd much rather use a library myself, all seems at least -basically- reasonable to me and will probably be far more comprehensible to you than whatever I'd reach for, and frameworks are always much more pleasant to approach after you've already done a bunch of stuff by banging rocks together first.
- Reddit just completed their migration out of React
-
Web Components Eliminate JavaScript Framework Lock-In
I work on Lit, which I would hesitate to call a framework, but gives a framework-like DX for building web components, while trying to keep opinions to a minimum and lock-in as low as possible.
It's got reactivity, declarative templates, great performance, SSR, TypeScript support, native CSS encapsulation, context, tasks, and more.
It's used to build Material Design, settings and devtools UIs for Chrome, some UI for Firefox, Reddit, Photoshop Web...
https://lit.dev if you're interested.
-
HTML Web Components
I am more a fan of the augmented style because it doesn't entrap you in dev lock-in to platforms.
The problem with frameworks, especially web frameworks, is they reimplement many items that are standard now (shadowdom, components, storage, templating, base libraries, class/async, network/realtime etc).
If you like the component style of other frameworks but want to use Web Components, Google Lit is quite nice.
Google Lit is like a combination of HTML Web Components and React/Vue style components. The great part is it is build on Web Components underneath.
[1] https://lit.dev/
-
Web Components Will Outlive Your JavaScript Framework
From the comments I see here, it seems like people expect the Webcomponents API to be a complete replacement for a JS framework. The thing is, our frameworks should start making use of modern web APIs, so the frameworks will have to do less themselves, so can be smaller. Lit [0] for example is doing this. Using Lit is very similar to using React. Some things work different, and you have to get used to some web component specific things, but once you get it, I think it's way more pleasant to work with than React. It feels more natural, native, less framework-specific.
For state management, I created LitState [1], a tiny library (really only 258 lines), which integrates nicely with Lit, and which makes state management between multiple components very easy. It's much easier than the Redux/flux workflows found in React.
So my experience with this is that it's much nicer to work with, and that the libraries are way smaller.
[0] https://lit.dev/
- Lit – a small responsive CSS framework
What are some alternatives?
download-esm - Download ESM modules from npm and jsdelivr
Svelte - Cybernetically enhanced web apps
quickjspp
stencil - A toolchain for building scalable, enterprise-ready component systems on top of TypeScript and Web Component standards. Stencil components can be distributed natively to React, Angular, Vue, and traditional web developers from a single, framework-agnostic codebase.
sciter-js-sdk
Vue.js - This is the repo for Vue 2. For Vue 3, go to https://github.com/vuejs/core
import-maps - How to control the behavior of JavaScript imports
Angular - Deliver web apps with confidence 🚀
webappsec-subresource-integrity - WebAppSec Subresource Integrity
htmx - </> htmx - high power tools for HTML
simpatico - Simpatico is an umbrella term for several data-structures and algorithms written in JavaScript
Preact - ⚛️ Fast 3kB React alternative with the same modern API. Components & Virtual DOM.