✳flâneur — a map of the web's best reading

Why you don’t need Socket.IO. Asynchronous communication between… | by Ivan Vanderbyl | codeburst

codeburst.io · 1,547 words · saved by 1 readers

Asynchronous communication between browsers and servers has come a very long way in the last 6 or 7 years. Back then, if you wanted to send a message asynchronously, you had to employ a bunch of hacks. These typically included some or all of the following: These hacks were commonly employed as part of the very popular abstraction library, Socket.IO. Which was designed to initiate a connection with the lowest common denominator, then ‘upgrade’ the connection if the client supported a better feature. This approach worked in nearly all cases, right back to browsers which nobody cares about anymore. However it came at the cost of expensive connection times, excess CPU/Memory/Garbage collection, extra resources to load, and a limited ability to support the developing standard features of the WebSockets protocol, which most notably until very recently, that meant binary streams. Over the years, Socket.IO became insanely popular, with over 25,000 stars on Github, and 5,000+ forks. But the pro

JavaScript Nodejs Socketio Programming Technology Why you don’t need Socket.IO Ivan Vanderbyl 6 min read · Mar 15, 2016 -- 22 Listen Share Asynchronous communication between browsers and servers has come a very long way in the last 6 or 7 years. Back then, if you wanted to send a message asynchronously, you had to employ a bunch of hacks. These typically included some or all of the following: Long polling Flash Sockets (yes, Adobe Flash) Possible upgrade to WebSockets These hacks were commonly employed as part of the very popular abstraction library, Socket.IO . Which was designed to initiate

Explore this link on the map →

related reading