News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on How Basecamp Next got to be so damn fast without using much client-side UI. Parent comment

Re:How Basecamp Next got to be so damn fast without using mu... by MatthewPhillips on Friday February 17, 2012 @10:09AM (#3603545)
Stacker sounds like AJAX as it was done in 2006, except trigger by pushState. Maybe I'm misunderstanding it though. I'd be curious what the performance penalty is on mobile.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:How Basecamp Next got to be so damn fast without using mu... by latch on Friday February 17, 2012 @10:30AM (#3603624)
Well, it's really stacker + pushState + MAX cache.

But why would there be a performance penalty? Doesn't this result in the client doing _less_ work all around? Less work than the multi-page approach...and less work from the client-side templating approach, no?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:How Basecamp Next got to be so damn fast without using mu... by asaeidi on Friday February 17, 2012 @02:01PM (#3604526)
Seems it's a highly refined version of what was done in the "old" days. I remember doing something similar for an old project in ASP.NET. (Well more similar to pjax)

As to performance on mobile, i think it might all depend on how large the html fragments are.

[ Parent | on HN ]