And with Uber, your destination is at your fingertips. Just open the app and enter where you want to go, and a nearby driver will help you get there reliably. Request a ride on demand or schedule one ahead of time.
That's why—in addition to our Door-to-Door Safety Standard—we've built new safety features and updated our Community Guidelines for respectful and positive experiences. You can contact emergency services You can call your local authorities directly from the app, and your location and trip details will be displayed so you can quickly share them with emergency services.
You can also let your driver know you appreciated your experience by adding a tip for them right in the app. Not all products are available in all markets. Have a question? Visit uber. We update the Uber app as often as possible to make it faster and more reliable for you. Rate us! Your feedback keeps the Uber engine running. Tap Help in the Uber app or visit help. When we need to get somewhere quickly and cheaply, this popular ride-sharing app motors to our rescue.
I've found analyzing the actual build products to be the best solution to make sure nothing unintended is happening. Are you interested in going back into the build process to try and thin the app directly? Or just in helping developers identify the sources of app size? Currently identifying sources and offering suggestions for how to make improvements.
For many apps this can reveal a lot of opportunity! I agree that it's not necessarily the most straightforwards, but I would think that in the hundreds of engineers they have at least some have figured out how it works to the point to which they can do this…. Expo produces ridiculously huge bundle sizes. I Would steer clear of it. Is the name a nod to Gentoo's emerge? I'd like to see Apple expose more control over their app thinning technologies.
Currently they only deliver the binary for the device's CPU, and only the assets for the device's asset class. There's then some tech targeted at game devs for on-demand assets for things like game levels that you don't need all of on device at one time. I suspect the limitations of this are around the binary not being subject to this, but maybe it could be. I can see a couple of options, one is some way of extending the asset classes to code features, so that the App Store doesn't have to download iPad screens for iPhones, etc.
Perhaps this could be extended with either App Store account region or locale so that, Uber in this example could not include the Venmo SDK outside of the US where no one has heard of Venmo.
Or perhaps Apple could extend the on-demand assets to allow for some sort of plugin system, perhaps backed by Swift Packages, such that apps can on-demand decide they need the Venmo SDK because they're in the US, and download just that.
I don't think we want a generalised package manager here, I don't envision that SDK coming from Venmo directly, but allowing an app author to upload all their separate packages if they want to. With feature heavy, international apps such as Uber I'd expect this to dramatically improve things. I'm not sure whether this benefit would translate to that much demand across the whole App Store though as I think this matters more to a very few big apps. Apple is at that optimisation point in the iOS lifecycle though so perhaps it's worth it to them.
Well since on demand resources were made for games lua is specifically called out as 'ok' , I could imagine many games also making their initial size far smaller if they used binary code to make new levels or regions. Games are very large chunk of the app store and it's revenue. Games don't really use those technologies because we want to use the same tech on Android and Apple so we typically roll our own or pay a third party BaaS.
The big players probably almost always roll there own. Sure, but until apple makes an official way to provide binary dynamic libraries on demand without breaking the app store rules, which would probably be delivered through something like binary on demand resources, the big game players cant do it either.
Whatever official version apple makes will probably update in the background better too, since they have full OS control, unlike ad hoc apps. Can someone help me understand this? Actual CPU instructions or config can't contribute this significantly.
The entire Bible is about 4. If you're writing an app by yourself you almost certainly didn't write that much text in the source code. I understand when games are large because they typically ship with images and videos included in the binary for game assets.
But for a normal application where does the size come from? Is it dependencies? That weird intro video they have on the loading screen? Are they shipping bitmaps of the cities they have markets in?
Uber's article focuses on binary size, but the App Store mb number is app bundle size. Let's say there are a hundred screens in the app and the app is mb. I do understand that source code isn't what ships in the binary, but for the sake argument let's say they're in size. It's probably to do with how the framework handles lifecycle management and combining static assets like text and image with business logic that lives in Controllers. This is par for the course for large companies with many engineers working on writing code without spending enough time on keeping app sizes low.
It must be mostly the dependencies and assets they're pulling in for each screen, and not simply the source code. They could be using a different SDK for each type of payment they take, which is a lot.
If the app has features, and each feature includes 4MB of assets images, icons, sounds, etc. Swift is a safe language with more runtime checks than other "zero-abstraction" languages. It also support "value" semantics and can deploy monomorphization for generics although no guarantee.
All these means you can have functions with slightly different view models duplicated many times throughout the binary. All in all, Swift as a language is not particularly optimized for small binary sizes, and there are a lot of trade-offs made to improve the usability rather than binary size. That has been said, there can be more opportunities exploited and right now not to reduce the binary size from compiler side.
Redoing the same code feature does not lead to exactly the same machine code. The same equivalent code in objective-c is significantly smaller than the same code with swift.
If you compare binary sizes of apps from the pre-swift era, you'll notice many are far smaller. Like I remember tweetbot being 4. I'm not very familiar with iOS dev, but I'd suspect a lot of dependencies, yes. Also, the Uber app has a LOT more features than you would expect at a glance, due to extensive customization of the experience i.
Edit: Linked post from sibling commenter bhupy outlines this in detail. The technique described in the article whole program instructions outlining optimisation is a band aid style solution, merely delaying the inevitable: the code produced by numerous teams independent of each other will inevitably cross first the download size limit threshold, and later maintainability threshold.
I also find it unbelievable to have so much code for a single app, this is approaching the level of magnitude of OS code bases: if you think that the entire Linux kernel is around 28M lines so roughly 15x the Uber app. The binary size is also from the same ballpark as the entire Windows 98 needed for installation. I'm glad Uber is doing something about this, but in my opinion Apple should tackle this across their entire ecosystem at the toolchain level, devices with less than 64GB of storage can quickly run out of space with just a handful of applications installed.
Unfortunately it's in Apple's interest that people buy devices with more storage, so I don't expect them to invest much effort in this. My theory is that it's of the same nature as underestimating development complexity when planning your own work as an engineer. Who hasn't thought at some point that they can write a Twitter clone in a weekend, or hasn't been fascinated by the amount of simple bugs in someone's else product, thinking that they are obviously just bad engineers.
For both technical and UX reasons it's in Apple's interest to make app updates lightweight, and those likely far outweigh any driving force they might have to encourage people to move to higher storage sizes. All that has to be load balanced, CDN'd, etc. I imagine there are a few attempts. Each team only needs to understand their modules and the few other modules they interact with.
They are already waaaay beyond the maintainability threshold. I'm sure swift's shifting sand castle language changes didn't help.
Good read. Good to know that Uber engineering culture was as much of a dumpster fire despite the brilliant moves as their product. Hmm, looks like this comment didn't go over well. I think they had brilliant engineers far beyond what I can even imagine that pulled-off incredible feats to avoid disaster.
But the disaster need not have loomed. Rewrite-the-world development smacks of what I call "cowboy engineering". Why didn't they migrate the existing code-base one layer at a time?
Brilliant is a big word for a company that still hasn't earned a profit. They took a lot of investor's money.. So in a sense it was a success. This is certainly an great read, and working on it must have very interesting.
That being said, in my experience things like these are invariably technical band-aids over social problems. But sometimes there is a lot to do, and if I may, Uber is not your usual app. At the point where you're being very choosy about the access modifiers on your classes, you probably thought about icon assets already. Someone elsewhere in thread linked to a partial list of concerns the app needs to cover, many of which are location-specific.
You might say "well split the app by geography", but that just trades one set of problems for another, and that new set of problems could well be worse for the business overall. Paying a team of people to do this junk may be a whole lot cheaper than suffering a reduction in customer engagement when they fly to a new country and don't have the right app anymore. You'd think, but many of the most popular apps accidentally ship these all the time. I think another comment mentioned that much of the code size seems to be coming from a code generation framework.
Presumably, machine code is a human expression of instructions to a computer and it is well established that all human languages show a power-law in the frequency of the words. Made me chuckle. Maybe the authors should look at getting an ACM subscription. This blog focuses on the machine instructions and analyzes just not instruction frequency but a whole sequence of instructions and their frequencies plus their lengths in an exhaustive manner.
Machine-code outlining sounds kind of like the opposite of function inlining. Right down to the name! I am amazed I've never heard of this optimization technique being used in compilers before -- it sounds like it could improve performance in many cases by making code smaller or hurt performance for the same reason that inlining can help performance It has Linux has 30 million of C!
I'm speechless. The first decision made in this decision tree is whether you just use wc , or whether you filter out empty lines. Next goes the comments. Wash rinse repeat. I would guess but only guess that this article erred on the side overstating size. It sounds like a lot, but it really isn't when you consider the amount of people working on it.
Now whether or not you can build the same thing with less LoC, probably. But it's not like it was built from the ground up with every piece of functionality planned out from day 1, so there will be inefficiencies. Comparing it to Linux is pointless. The app is the size of a Debian installer with dozens of executables made over the course of 50 years. Cannot fathom why LOC is a metric? Me neither. Lots of stuff has millions of lines of code in various languages with wide ranging feature-sets and functionality.
It's maybe a naive question, but from my point of view I don't understand why it's even a problem. Why is the Uber app so big? This article is bogus. They spend a whole bunch of time benchmarking build sizes, nothing about why they need so much code in an iOS app to begin with. Apple has dropped limits for large app downloads on cellular.
They now put up a dialog to tell the user how big the download is and if they wish to defer to a WiFi download. Your Phone is a tool designed to mirror your Android phone's content to a computer so that you can access photos and videos without having to send them via email to yourself first. It is important to note that the app currently works with the most recent 25 Android phones that are currently able to run Android 7.
Once you grab the tool from the Microsoft Store, you need to spend a few minutes synchronizing your Android smartphone with the PC, a task you can complete easily by following the instructions provided. According to the developer, you need to download a tool to your phone that can help you set up the connection via the remoteSystem feature. One tap and a car comes directly to you. Your driver knows exactly where to go. And payment is completely cashless.
Daily commute. Errand across town. Early morning flight. Late night drinks. You can always request everyday cars at everyday prices.
But sometimes you need a bit more space.
0コメント