After I wrote about a GZipStream and then the DeflateStream. I expected a minor difference because the two compression methods are different, but the result astonished me. I measured the DeflateStream to 41% faster than GZip. That's a very big difference. With this knowledge, I'll have to change the HTTP compression module to choose Deflate over GZip.
Found an error or have a suggestion? Let us know and we'll review it.
 {
function initCopyableSections() {
document.querySelectorAll('.article-content .copyable-section').forEach(function(section) {
if (section.querySelector('.copyable-section__btn')) return;
var btn = document.createElement('button');
btn.type = 'button';
btn.className = 'copyable-section__btn';
btn.setAttribute('aria-label', 'Copy to clipboard');
var label = section.getAttribute('data-copy-label');
btn.textContent = label ? 'Copy ' + label : 'Copy';
section.appendChild(btn);
btn.addEventListener('click', function() {
var contentEl = section.querySelector('.copyable-section__content');
var text;
if (contentEl) {
text = contentEl.textContent.trim();
} else {
var clone = section.cloneNode(true);
var btnClone = clone.querySelector('.copyable-section__btn');
if (btnClone) btnClone.parentNode.removeChild(btnClone);
text = clone.textContent.trim();
}
if (!text) return;
navigator.clipboard.writeText(text).then(function() {
var t = btn.textContent;
btn.textContent = 'Copied!';
btn.classList.add('copied');
setTimeout(function() {
btn.textContent = t;
btn.classList.remove('copied');
}, 2000);
});
});
});
}
if (document.readyState === 'loading') {
document.addEventListener('DOMContentLoaded', initCopyableSections);
} else {
initCopyableSections();
}
})();
</script>
<!-- Tags -->
<!-- Correction Form -->
<div class=)
Suggest a Correction
GZip vs. Deflate - Compression and Performance
0 views
Comments (0)
Please sign in to leave a comment.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!