1,732 karma · joined July 10, 2011
> it takes a real commitment from the leadership to fully integrate remote team members
This is so true. I thought this would only be manageable for relatively small companies, and that it was natural for Silicon Valley companies to loose this culture as they grow rapidly, so it's very inspiring to see this kind of commitment from a company as large as Stripe.
https://speakerdeck.com/mourner/fast-by-default-everyday-alg...
Here's a good thread with benchmarks that compare Earcut (also one of my libraries) to C++ and AssemblyScript WebAssembly ports: https://github.com/mapbox/mapbox-gl-js/issues/4835 (in short, mostly slower than JS)
Another anecdotal example is that C++ and Rust ports of https://github.com/mapbox/delaunator (my Delaunay triangulation library) are only 10-15% faster.
[1] https://blog.mapbox.com/a-dive-into-spatial-search-algorithm...
I traveled the world quite a bit, but never felt like relocating to any other city — sure, they are huge issues, but if you surround yourself with good people, it's wonderful to live here.
One of our core devs (Ivan) works on Leaflet WebGL renderer, but I'd like it to remain a plugin, so that Leaflet stays true to its goal — to be as small and simple as possible.
It's true that Mapbox currently focuses its efforts on GL, but they are not "moving away from Leaflet" — Leaflet will continue to be supported as one of the first-class clients to be used with Mapbox services (and GL-based styles have a raster tiles fallback). Leaflet is very mature, has a huge community, is suited for most simple mapping needs, is very easy to learn, and doesn't require a lot of development effort from the Mapbox side to support.
Mapbox GL on the other hand represents a vector rendering technology, which is very different. It is much more powerful than conventional raster tile based clients, and enables applications never seen before in the online mapping industry, but it's also many times heavier, more complex, and much harder to learn. Rendering vector data on the client is something Mapbox bets on as the future of mapping, but it's incredibly challenging to build, so it requires a lot of focus.
I'll continue to maintain both libraries — while they have some overlap, there's a place for both.