12 ms·

What you're suggesting won't work. The problem is that a lot of pages require their resources to be loaded in a specific order. The C in CSS stands for cascadin

What you're suggesting won't work. The problem is that a lot of pages require their resources to be loaded in a specific order. The C in CSS stands for cascading, and means that rules that are loaded later override earlier ones (if selector specificity match). The same goes for JS since later scripts might depend on the framework or libraries loaded in earlier, unless the script has the async attribute. And then there are the content which are loaded by the CSS and JS themselves, which in most modern web apps make up the majority of the content.

eloff 10y ago
Nonsense. You have the css and javascripts. You just aren't certain that they're the most recent version. So you go ahead and render the page using either the version you have, or requesting it from the server, still doing everything in order. Then you validate your assumptions in the background about the stale versions you used still being the most current. If your assumptions are right (and mostly they will be) nothing happens. If they're wrong, you re-render the page, again all in order.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- jasonkester 10y ago
  Sense. It makes a difference if you run an old javascript file before loading its new replacement and running that. As in, Original script: <script> location.href="http://google.com"; </script> New script <script> // oops! forgot to remove this // location.href="http://google.com"; </script> You'll want to make sure you have the right version in place before you try to run either of them.
  - eloff 10y ago
    You have a point. What about CSS? At first I think it would just render funny, but some javascript actually interacts with the CSS, e.g. jQuery selectors based on style classes or something. So it has the same problem really. Images would be safe. Or an alternate plan, start rendering, but do not run the javascript until the resource checks for css+js files return. It would slow things down some more, but not as much as waiting for everything.
    - jasonkester 10y ago
      Before: body { background:blue; } After: body {} It would play out similar to the Flash of Unstyled Content issue, but substituting "unpredictably wacky" for "unstyled".

eloff 10y ago

Nonsense. You have the css and javascripts. You just aren't certain that they're the most recent version. So you go ahead and render the page using either the version you have, or requesting it from the server, still doing everything in order. Then you validate your assumptions in the background about the stale versions you used still being the most current. If your assumptions are right (and mostly they will be) nothing happens. If they're wrong, you re-render the page, again all in order.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
jasonkester 10y ago
Sense. It makes a difference if you run an old javascript file before loading its new replacement and running that. As in, Original script: <script> location.href="http://google.com"; </script> New script <script> // oops! forgot to remove this // location.href="http://google.com"; </script> You'll want to make sure you have the right version in place before you try to run either of them.
- eloff 10y ago
  You have a point. What about CSS? At first I think it would just render funny, but some javascript actually interacts with the CSS, e.g. jQuery selectors based on style classes or something. So it has the same problem really. Images would be safe. Or an alternate plan, start rendering, but do not run the javascript until the resource checks for css+js files return. It would slow things down some more, but not as much as waiting for everything.
  - jasonkester 10y ago
    Before: body { background:blue; } After: body {} It would play out similar to the Flash of Unstyled Content issue, but substituting "unpredictably wacky" for "unstyled".