cash VS httparchive.org

Maybe a small JQuery clone like a Cash - https://github.com/fabiospampinato/cash or SurfJS https://surf.monster/ (Surf has a delay/queue, reactive templates) might help for writing less code and is still JavaScript

If stock jQuery seems too big and you have a lot of code you'd prefer not to waste time converting, try something like jQuery-slim or cash.

It was initially released in 2010. But there is a plan to create version 3.0 that will be rewritten in TypeScript and without dependency on jQuery. The plan is to use a modern Cash library to not modify the code that much.

I find that cash.js does everything I need from Jquery and it's a fraction of the size, it's great to see advancements in technology to the point that you can fit that much functionality into 6KB

Yes but it's more than just that. In relation to DOM manipulation libs like JQuery it's small and on par with something like https://github.com/fabiospampinato/cash

If you are mainly using jquery for its DOM manipulation¹ rather than for browser compatibility² or things that didn't exist consistently in older browsers³ then there are much smaller libraries that do that job which may be worth looking into. https://github.com/fabiospampinato/cash or https://github.com/franciscop/umbrella to give a couple of examples. Some explicitly support IE11 so you are not dropping as much support for legacy browsers as you might otherwise.

Though if jQuery works for you and isn't a performance issue, then by all means keep with it. It may not be ideal, but good enough and does the job. Let the naysayers spend their time debating whether you should or not, and just get on with making things!

---

[1] selection engine, chained selections, chained modifications, …

[2] not the issue it once was, if you can abandon IE and old Android browsers from your supported UAs or can deal with any issues that crop up individually

[3] again, if you can afford to drop support for legacy UAs

I think it's a bit of both. jQuery served the purpose of making web development more sane back in the day by handling all browser quirks. Part of that was the nice syntax.

I personally have tried to drop jQuery, but truthfully, its syntax is just much easier to use. Nowadays, I use Cash https://github.com/fabiospampinato/cash to give me the nice syntax without the bloat. It strikes the perfect balance for me.

Taking a look at Cash so I don't have to rewrite a metric flock-ton of code. https://github.com/fabiospampinato/cash. Looking through the migration guide, I don't see any issues that affect my codebase (famous last words).

Cash's maintainer here. I don't think this is true actually.

Zepto supports some methods that Cash doesn't, but you probably shouldn't use them to begin with, like $.ajax, $.isArray, $.fn.animate etc. In 2022 either better built-in solutions exist or better specialized tiny libraries exist.

Everything that is supported by both Zepto and Cash should either work identically or Cash's implementation should be closer to jQuery's. Just to mention one thing in this regard you can run jQuery's test suite with Cash, and Cash's test suite with jQuery, easily [0]. I've done so and looked at every single failed test manually a few times, I doubt nearly the same level of attention went into Zepto. Just to mention one difference: Cash supports jQuery-style event namespacing, Zepto just doesn't support this.

[0]: https://github.com/fabiospampinato/cash/blob/272132a6dc1d885...

Astro didn't capture the data themselves, it's data from The HTTP Archive.

Based on HTTP Archive real-world performance data (Lighthouse, P90) • Read the full report

A longstanding problem in the HTTP Archive dataset has been extracting insights from blobs of HTML in BigQuery. For example, take the source code of example.com:

The data for this chart came from the wonderful httparchive.org. Tools used to make the chart: Python, Pandas, Matplotlib.

First of all, web development hasn't really evolved that much in the last decade, or it all depends on what you mean by “evolved”. Sure, there’s webpack and React and ES6, but according to data from httparchive.org the median page load time has remained about the same over the past 10 years, even though internet speeds have been steadily increasing, along with rapid advancements in hardware. So it’s safe to say that the internet is faster, but websites aren’t. In addition, as the team behind the Skypack utility has pointed out, “building for the web has never been more complicated.”

The technologies you use to build your website can have an effect on your ability to deliver good user experiences. Good UX is key to performing well with Core Web Vitals (CWV), a topic which is probably top of mind for you, as it is for many other web developers now that these metrics play a role in Google Search ranking. While web developers have had tools like Search Console and PageSpeed Insights to get data on how their sites are performing, the web community has been lacking a tool that has operated at the macro level, giving us something more like WebSpeed Insights. By combining the powers of real-user experiences in the Chrome UX Report (CrUX) dataset with web technology detections in HTTP Archive, we can get a glimpse into how architectural decisions like choices of CMS platform or JavaScript framework play a role in sites' CWV performance. The merger of these datasets is a dashboard called the Core Web Vitals Technology Report.

One of the main things that affect performance and is not so easy to optimize in a web application is assets such as images and videos. Images form almost half of all web content, and so optimizing them goes a very long way to improve experiences with applications. Images are unique because they are not usually compressed in an optimal way and they load all at once on the web and so the Next team decided to solve this. An image component in Next abstracts and enables images to be optimized without any input from you, the developer. Great right? All you have to do is replace the img element with Image from Next. Here is how it is done. Let’s say your image tag is like this:

The HTTP Archive runs Lighthouse audits for approximately 7.2 million websites every month. In the May 2021 dataset, Lighthouse was able to identify an LCP element in 97.35% of the tests. Since we have the ability to query all of these Lighthouse test results, we can analyze the result of the LCP audits and get more insight into what drives this metric across the web.

A good place for data around this is the HTTP Archive (https://httparchive.org/). It has collected data and reports.