What are the differences in performance between synchronous and asynchronous JavaScript script loading?
        Posted  
        
            by 
                jasdeepkhalsa
            
        on Stack Overflow
        
        See other posts from Stack Overflow
        
            or by jasdeepkhalsa
        
        
        
        Published on 2012-12-10T16:56:52Z
        Indexed on 
            2012/12/10
            17:03 UTC
        
        
        Read the original article
        Hit count: 193
        
JavaScript
|asynchronous
My question is simply: what are the differences in performance between synchronous and asynchronous JavaScript script loading?
From what I've gathered synchronous code blocks the loading of a page and/or rest of the code from executing. This happens at two levels.
First, at the level of the script actually loading, and secondly, within the JavaScript code itself.
For example, on the page:
Synchronous: <script src="demo_async.js" type="text/javascript"></script>
Asynchronous: <script async src="demo_async.js" type="text/javascript"></script>
And within a script:
Synchronous: function a() {alert("a"); function b() {alert("b");}}
Asynchronous (and self-executing):
(function(a,
    function(b){
        alert(b);
    })
 {
 alert(a);
 }))();
So what really is the difference in performance from using these different loading methods and JavaScript patterns?
© Stack Overflow or respective owner