When that metric is "performance in real workloads", I can't imagine it ever becoming irrelevant. Just look at their new tests:
> In particular, we added new tests that simulate rendering canvas and SVG charts (React Stockcharts, Chart.js, Perf Dashboard, and Observable Plot), code editing (CodeMirror), WYSIWYG editing (TipTap), and reading news sites (Next.js and Nuxt.js).
> We’ve also improved the TodoMVC tests: updating the code to adapt to the most common versions of the most popular frameworks based on data from the the HTTP Archive. The following frameworks and libraries are included: Angular, Backbone, jQuery, Lit, Preact, React, React+Redux, Svelte, and Vue; along with vanilla JavaScript implementations targeting ES5 and ES6, and a Web Components version. We also introduced more complex versions of these tests which are embedded into a bigger DOM tree with many complex CSS rules that more closely emulate the page weight and structure from popular webapps today.
Improving these benchmark results will at least partially make those libraries faster in the real world, and most likely also many additional libraries and workloads.
The article even links to real-world performance measurements that are completely separate from the benchmark. I have no idea what the purpose of the OP's comment was. I guess they just wanted to blurt out the first cynical thing that came to mind. Awesome contribution.
I love the fact that an honest question is met with such hostility. I knew there was a quote, but was unable to think of it well enough for a proper search. It is easier to find an answer from other people with just a shard of detail that search engine will not find as there's no SEO for the broken fragment.
I'm so happy to see this place is alive and well with the attitude to support a curious mind. What a tosser
I've probably spent too much time on the internet, then, because I definitely wouldn't have interpreted your original post as an honest question without having seen the clarification in your followup comment. Probably a defense mechanism built from past pain caused by my assuming good faith and then being ridiculed from the non-honest-question-asker.
But with that nastiness out of the way - I looked back at your original question and thought "seems like the kind of query Kagi would eat for breakfast". Here's what it responded to your question: https://kagi.com/search?q=What%27s+the+quote+about+optimizin...
Specifically, the "what" at the start and the "?" at the end triggered the LLM-powered quick answer at the top (and it passes the smell test for correctness).
To Google's credit, it also returns reasonable results for this question.
> In particular, we added new tests that simulate rendering canvas and SVG charts (React Stockcharts, Chart.js, Perf Dashboard, and Observable Plot), code editing (CodeMirror), WYSIWYG editing (TipTap), and reading news sites (Next.js and Nuxt.js).
> We’ve also improved the TodoMVC tests: updating the code to adapt to the most common versions of the most popular frameworks based on data from the the HTTP Archive. The following frameworks and libraries are included: Angular, Backbone, jQuery, Lit, Preact, React, React+Redux, Svelte, and Vue; along with vanilla JavaScript implementations targeting ES5 and ES6, and a Web Components version. We also introduced more complex versions of these tests which are embedded into a bigger DOM tree with many complex CSS rules that more closely emulate the page weight and structure from popular webapps today.
Improving these benchmark results will at least partially make those libraries faster in the real world, and most likely also many additional libraries and workloads.