Re: [WebERP-developers] About MiscFunctions.js

[Andrew G. <aga...@re...>]

I vote no added comments but spaces in code if that isn't too much overhead.


From: Phil Daintree [mailto:ph...@lo...]
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 2:23 PM
To: webERP Developers
Subject: Re: [WebERP-developers] About MiscFunctions.js


There is a bit of a double standard there I agree ... I think Tim even used single letter variable names etc to minimise the overhead.

I also like readable and there is a compromise position ... you decide where that is Rafael.

Phil



Phil Daintree

Logic Works Ltd - +64 (0)275 567890

http://www.logicworks.co.nz
On 19/10/16 07:09, Rafael Chacón wrote:
Hi,

Recently, I updated the file MiscFunctions.js. I added comments and improve the format. Now it is more easy to understand the code.
l
But it has a big disadvantage: Each html page generated by the webERP loads that file through ~/includes/header.inc. That is: if we add comments and reformat the code to make it very easy to understand, we increase the traffic of that file to about 239% (more comments and spaces in formatting code).

Someone say me that he prefers a minimum file size to prioritise the principle "low footprint" (absolutely minimal network traffic) over to "easily readable", because this file is modified infrequently. That is: to have a MiscFunctions.js without comments (explanations) and put them in the manual. Also, to remove the spacing for easy reading.

I agree. But, if we are strict, that "minimising" principle should apply to all JavaScript, CSS and HTML code.

Comments? Opinions?

Best regards, Rafael.




------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most

engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot




_______________________________________________

Web-erp-developers mailing list

Web...@li...<mailto:Web...@li...>

https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/web-erp-developers