Are ES6 modules in browsers going to get loaded level-by-level?

Glen glen.84 at gmail.com
Thu Apr 16 21:30:08 UTC 2015


You might find this interesting: 
https://ma.ttias.be/architecting-websites-http2-era/#comment-10935

(PUSH_PROMISE frame)

Glen.

On 2015/04/16 22:43, John Barton wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Domenic Denicola <d at domenic.me 
> <mailto:d at domenic.me>> wrote:
>
>     From: John Barton [mailto:johnjbarton at google.com
>     <mailto:johnjbarton at google.com>]
>
>     > But the push scenario in your first paragraph would not use the
>     cache either.
>
>     Yeah, that's what I was alluding to with the "most naïve" comment.
>
>     >  one or the other has to send its information at the outset of a
>     import request, or
>
>     One way of doing this I came up with off the top of my head is to
>     add some kind of "dependency graph version" or hash to the query
>     string. I.e. <script type="module" src="entry.js?1234"></script>.
>     The server can then assume that the client has in its cache
>     version 1234 of the dependency graph, and can push the incremental
>     updates since then (i.e. added or modified files). If parts of the
>     cache were evicted, so that the versioning signal is not entirely
>     accurate, then the penalty is not so bad, as you just fall back to
>     the normal loading process for the evicted subset.
>
>     But I feel pretty silly speculating here as I'm not an expert on
>     HTTP/2 techniques, and there are probably other methods that are
>     better in various ways.
>
>
> Perhaps, but I feel the issue is more fundamental. HTTP/2 shares 
> statelessness with HTTP/1. It follows that the state of the client 
> must be sent to the server or vice versa.  HTTP/2 can make that 
> process much faster but it's not going to know what state to send 
> without instructions from clients or from servers. We can all make up 
> those instructions one at a time and in our own unique ways or the 
> module experts can come up with a good solution for the common cases.  
> I'm hoping for the latter ;-)
>
> jjb
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20150416/5fa0eec2/attachment.html>


More information about the es-discuss mailing list