Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

No need, because you can gzip compress, which will make even better savings than that (because it can also compress and save space taken by tags etc, not just class names).


You could do that and gzip though; it would probably yield some savings.

An obfuscator generating code à la iocc efficiency would be quite neat (e.g. http://www.ioccc.org/2012/endoh1/endoh1.c)


>You could do that and gzip though; it would probably yield some savings.

Nope. That's classic non-engineer thinking. The same kind of thinking that does "optimization" without profiling.

Let me introduce you to my friend: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diminishing_returns


"some savings" says the parent. A diminishing return is still a return.


And 0.0000000000001 of a dollar is still money. Yet it's meaningless to do anything about getting it...


I can say the savings would probably be greater than the 50 bytes he saved on the domain name. Compressing is not magical, if you compress class names you're still storing at least one instance of each name plus overhead.




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2026 batch! Applications are open till July 27.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: