Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Increased asset size from -assert-implicit-component-helper-argument #18598

Closed
chriskrycho opened this issue Dec 6, 2019 · 6 comments · Fixed by #19081
Closed

Increased asset size from -assert-implicit-component-helper-argument #18598

chriskrycho opened this issue Dec 6, 2019 · 6 comments · Fixed by #19081
Labels

Comments

@chriskrycho
Copy link
Contributor

Unconditionally including the -assert-implicit-component-helper-argument (added in #17135) in builds can lead to significant increases in code size, especially in large apps with lots of components. Also related: #17251.

Given that Ember can now do different template builds for prod and dev, it would be great if we could pull this assertion back out of prod builds!

@rwjblue
Copy link
Member

rwjblue commented Dec 6, 2019

Thanks for reporting! @chancancode and I have discussed this a few times, we definitely need to fix it.

Now that we are a "real addon", we can actually do the same thing most other addons do RE: template compilation transforms.

@rwjblue rwjblue added the Bug label Dec 6, 2019
@nlfurniss
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks for reporting! @chancancode and I have discussed this a few times, we definitely need to fix it.

Now that we are a "real addon", we can actually do the same thing most other addons do RE: template compilation transforms.

Any examples of how this is done? If this doesn’t require a Rob Jackson or Godfrey level of knowledge I can take a look at it.

@chriskrycho
Copy link
Contributor Author

@rwjblue @krisselden did the recent fixes around templates include this?

@rwjblue
Copy link
Member

rwjblue commented Aug 4, 2020

@chriskrycho - No, those comparisons are from 3.16 to 3.17 (but 3.16 already included this growth).

@chriskrycho
Copy link
Contributor Author

Ah, okay. For our app's sake, we'd still be happy to dig into it if we can steal a tiny bit of your mentoring time sometime Soon™! (It could help us mitigate the other 3.16→3.20 costs as well, even as you're all working on tackling those.)

@rwjblue
Copy link
Member

rwjblue commented Aug 5, 2020

Ya, I'd love the help (even if just to force "The Plan" into writing). Let's set up a deep dive session to chat through it when you have time...

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants