css-in-js? Rofl. Whats next? Html-in-js?

There's room for improvement still. Currently, the production build is using long-dev class names. e.g. `DirectoryContent-module__Box_3__gl6dE` could be compiled to a shorter hash like `gl6DE3a2`.

If you use Vite:

  css: {
    modules: {
      generateScopedName: mode === 'production'
        ? '[hash:base64:8]'
        : '[name]__[local]___[hash:base64:5]',
      }
    }

Those class names surely gzip better than hashes over the wire?

Here's a comparison using `brotli --best` on my app.

   53K _long.css
   38K _short.css

   11K _long.css.br
  8.9K _short.css.br

Both, dev and prod, have hashes because that's part of what CSS Modules uses to avoid collisions.

Besides download size, smaller names improve parsing speed too.

I don't know how they perceive the performance. I see 41 network requests. That's 2.1 MB of CSS over the wire, blocking rendering and hurting painting and loading speed. There's 400 KB of Tailwind, 87 KB of general CSS, plus another 200 KB of other general CSS. They need to embrace functional CSS properly. I'm sure they could have a single CSS file under 80 KB that renders everything.

These type of comments often come from a place of arm-chair reasoning where you might not sit on the experience of working hands-on in a large team on a large product. While it’s probably true that X kB sufficient, that amount of performance optimisation is usually not warranted at this scale. Maintaining a design system, working with scoped classes, legacy code, and dealing with the complexities of chunking and probably further challenges we are not aware of from the outside. It seems like a common sentiment on HN (maybe not you in particular) is that engineers should drop everything and work overtime on optimizing performance, when it comes to web apps

The shitty team excuse.

Performance is not complicated. You measure something and compare the numbers. Through my career I have encountered the following failures repeatedly:

* The complete inability to measure things. This is common among people with low social intelligence. Many people in this line of work cannot measure things and form all kinds of bullshit excuses. Cannot do it all as if they are disabled. Sometimes it is laziness, sometimes it’s autism masking, and sometimes it’s stupidity/ignorance where they believe they shouldn’t have to or are superior from convention alone.

* The shitty team argument. It’s common for people to intentionally avoid or discard measures because there is fear superior performance may indicate an operating deficit. The last thing anybody in software wants is to change approach if they are on a shitty team, because corporate developers are allergic to training people. This is often justified by asking what happens if you work on a team or about new hires.

* Throwing performance data away and lying about it. This is very common when performance data provides evidence that current conventions or favorite tools harm performance. If, for example querySelectors measure 100,000 times slower than some other approaches developers will pretend the performance evidence just doesn’t exist.

* Guessing. When people suck at what they do they invent their own performance realities. When people guess at software performance they are supremely wrong more than 80% of the time and tend to be wrong by multiple orders of magnitude.

You’re confidently making a lot of assumptions that don’t generalize.

For example:

performance is not complicated

Not to mention all your assumptions about the motivations of people who don’t do optimization well. That one can’t possibly generalize.

They are not generalizations. They are frequently repeated observations. The ability to operate from evidence is what determines if you are working with real professionals or children pretenders.

You measure and improve the metric, but at what cost, when should you stop? Have you worked on a 1mill+ loc web app?

This sort of comment has completely lost the forest for the trees.

You’re conflating scale with bloat. At large orgs the problem is that nobody is willing to step back and say “this sucks”. Trying to get this fixed involves getting 6 teams to agree upon something with no clear owner for the outcome and with everyone incentivised for not being blamed if one of the other groups tanks the effort.

engineers should drop everything and work overtime on optimising performance

No, we’re asking for it to be taken seriously by the organisation. I work in games, and on large projects we usually have a small team (2/3 people of a team of 80-100) who are constantly working on this stuff. Their work is “subjective” improvements but often it’s just building tooling and telling other groups what they need to fix.

2.1MB is nothing for the user.

Any time I see criticism of CSS in JS, and a move to CSS modules, I get sad they didn’t just do a bit more research. You can have both, while also not shipping any JS runtime for CSS in JS! And with TypeScript support.

https://vanilla-extract.style/

Using GitHub everyday, I haven't really noticed an improved performance. Actually i'd say pages are becoming slower. Browsing issues with many comments or big PR has a terrible experience as not everything gets loaded