Comments on: Crockford, webhosting, online dating, JSON, alert http://www.stevesouders.com/blog/2009/12/10/crockford-alert/ Essential knowledge for making your web pages faster. Sat, 04 Feb 2012 09:46:28 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: adventure singles http://www.stevesouders.com/blog/2009/12/10/crockford-alert/#comment-2284 adventure singles Fri, 27 Aug 2010 11:21:11 +0000 http://www.stevesouders.com/blog/?p=800#comment-2284 Oh i couldn't stop laughing. Doug handled the problem very well :). Thanks Collin paul Oh i couldn’t stop laughing. Doug handled the problem very well :).

Thanks
Collin paul

]]> By: Douglas http://www.stevesouders.com/blog/2009/12/10/crockford-alert/#comment-1393 Douglas Fri, 15 Jan 2010 18:03:25 +0000 http://www.stevesouders.com/blog/?p=800#comment-1393 @Scott: That's not a positive, that's a negative. What happens when that hotlinked script's bugfix or enhancement breaks your site? @Scott: That’s not a positive, that’s a negative. What happens when that hotlinked script’s bugfix or enhancement breaks your site?

]]> By: Scott http://www.stevesouders.com/blog/2009/12/10/crockford-alert/#comment-1392 Scott Fri, 15 Jan 2010 16:52:20 +0000 http://www.stevesouders.com/blog/?p=800#comment-1392 Never mind the BTW above, I see what you're doing. Never mind the BTW above, I see what you’re doing.

]]> By: Scott http://www.stevesouders.com/blog/2009/12/10/crockford-alert/#comment-1391 Scott Fri, 15 Jan 2010 16:51:34 +0000 http://www.stevesouders.com/blog/?p=800#comment-1391 Nice! (Trying to word this right and not getting it, please read between the lines). There is some level of value in referencing files from their "home" servers in that you get any bug fixes/enhancements without having to remember to check for new versions. Any notions how to weigh that positive versus the negatives outlined here? (BTW, the spam blocker question is: "5 plus twenty-to" instead of twenty-two). Nice!

(Trying to word this right and not getting it, please read between the lines).

There is some level of value in referencing files from their “home” servers in that you get any bug fixes/enhancements without having to remember to check for new versions.

Any notions how to weigh that positive versus the negatives outlined here?

(BTW, the spam blocker question is: “5 plus twenty-to” instead of twenty-two).

]]> By: Lennie http://www.stevesouders.com/blog/2009/12/10/crockford-alert/#comment-1371 Lennie Thu, 14 Jan 2010 12:51:13 +0000 http://www.stevesouders.com/blog/?p=800#comment-1371 @Agustin Colchado Actually, Twitter.com (social networking site ;-) ) loads from googleapis.com. Alexa says it's 14 worldwide. @Agustin Colchado Actually, Twitter.com (social networking site ;-) ) loads from googleapis.com. Alexa says it’s 14 worldwide.

]]> By: ishak http://www.stevesouders.com/blog/2009/12/10/crockford-alert/#comment-1311 ishak Sat, 09 Jan 2010 13:12:24 +0000 http://www.stevesouders.com/blog/?p=800#comment-1311 hahaha.. doug rules! hahaha.. doug rules!

]]> By: Marcis Gasuns http://www.stevesouders.com/blog/2009/12/10/crockford-alert/#comment-1267 Marcis Gasuns Wed, 23 Dec 2009 08:04:40 +0000 http://www.stevesouders.com/blog/?p=800#comment-1267 And how about Google Analytics external file? And how about Google Analytics external file?

]]> By: Pid http://www.stevesouders.com/blog/2009/12/10/crockford-alert/#comment-1258 Pid Sun, 20 Dec 2009 12:06:30 +0000 http://www.stevesouders.com/blog/?p=800#comment-1258 @gwenhwyfaer Are you serious? 1. Users, real ones, have no idea what scripts you're using. 2. Your browsers cache is designed to cope with different sites using different files. A script is no different to an image. 3. What evidence do you have that multiple copies of a script file "in memory" is bad? @gwenhwyfaer Are you serious?

1. Users, real ones, have no idea what scripts you’re using.

2. Your browsers cache is designed to cope with different sites using different files. A script is no different to an image.

3. What evidence do you have that multiple copies of a script file “in memory” is bad?

]]> By: Bob http://www.stevesouders.com/blog/2009/12/10/crockford-alert/#comment-1250 Bob Wed, 16 Dec 2009 01:52:50 +0000 http://www.stevesouders.com/blog/?p=800#comment-1250 The "google" question is really simple: You ask the owner of the host if its OK to link directly to the script hosted on their server, and you ask yourself if the security implications are acceptable. If google says "use us directly" and you trust them, it's ok. If google says "host a copy of the file yourself" or if you don't trust them, then it's not ok. How complicated can that be? The “google” question is really simple:

You ask the owner of the host if its OK to link directly to the script hosted on their server, and you ask yourself if the security implications are acceptable.

If google says “use us directly” and you trust them, it’s ok.

If google says “host a copy of the file yourself” or if you don’t trust them, then it’s not ok.

How complicated can that be?

]]> By: gwenhwyfaer http://www.stevesouders.com/blog/2009/12/10/crockford-alert/#comment-1249 gwenhwyfaer Wed, 16 Dec 2009 01:08:22 +0000 http://www.stevesouders.com/blog/?p=800#comment-1249 Good call. But how does one counterbalance this with the desire of users (at least the more on-the-ball ones) to avoid ending up with one copy of jQuery / json2.js / GWT per site using it in their browser caches - or worse, in memory at once? Good call. But how does one counterbalance this with the desire of users (at least the more on-the-ball ones) to avoid ending up with one copy of jQuery / json2.js / GWT per site using it in their browser caches – or worse, in memory at once?

]]>