Have you tried it without the quotes around the property name in
Object.defineProperties?
Also, if you're looking to prevent renaming by the GCC, you may want to
look into the use of 'externs' files:
https://developers.google.com/closure/compiler/docs/api-tutorial3#externs
EdB
On Mon, Apr 6, 2
Alex,
I used 'http://closure-compiler.appspot.com/' with this input:
// ==ClosureCompiler==
// @compilation_level ADVANCED_OPTIMIZATIONS
// @warning_level VERBOSE
// @language ECMASCRIPT5_STRICT
// ==/ClosureCompiler==
'use strict';
/**
* @constructor
*/
var org_apache_flex_utils_BinaryData =
Hi Alex,
you were right. The readme was still refering to the paths of the last Version.
I updated the documentation and will try the "downloaders" again with all the
versions we have ... just to make sure. So I'll cancel the vote. But feel free
to check my latest changes to the Notice (Year)
Hi Erik,
That’s interesting. I’ll try that site. I would have expected the
compiler to rename position to some one or two-letter variable. Can you
tell me why it didn’t?
-Alex
On 4/6/15, 5:17 AM, "Erik de Bruin" wrote:
>Alex,
>
>I used 'http://closure-compiler.appspot.com/' with this input:
I'm assuming (but can't find any directly relevant links ;-) that this
is because the JS spec (ECMA) says that an object's properties should
be addressable with quoted AND dotted notification (i.e. obj['prop']
and obj.prop). If the compiler renamed the property, it would remove
the ability to use q
Hi Chris,
So in the new process, post another set of artifacts but don’t start a
vote until you see the discuss thread converge on everyone being ok with
the artifacts. Feel free to improve the wiki docs on the process to make
that more clear.
I looked at the diff of a commit you just made to RE
On 4/6/15, 12:25 AM, "Erik de Bruin" wrote:
>Have you tried it without the quotes around the property name in
>Object.defineProperties?
I did, and no luck there either. And in the final result, there will be
some properties that are accessed by name and thus can’t be renamed (well,
at least n
Hi,
I'm currently going through the different versions oft he FDKs ... one thing I
noticed was that as soon as I add the Font handling stuff, the
lib/external/optional directory contains an additional swfutils.jar file ...
why this and what is is used for? I thought the FDK already contains an
On 4/6/15, 10:08 AM, "Christofer Dutz" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I'm currently going through the different versions oft he FDKs ... one
>thing I noticed was that as soon as I add the Font handling stuff, the
>lib/external/optional directory contains an additional swfutils.jar file
>... why this and what i
This is very strange. It could be that certain words like position and
data are in a blacklist. I tried this (essentially the same example but
using productService as the name)
// ==ClosureCompiler==
// @compilation_level ADVANCED_OPTIMIZATIONS
// @output_file_name default.js
// @language ECMASC
Alex,
I think what you're seeing is an artifact of the way you've set up
your example... You don't instantiate the object and never reference
the property outside of the class' internals. WIth such a minimal
case, that basically doesn't execute, the compiler thinks it can be
smart and 'optimize' a
Hi Erik,
Well, this renaming issue is coming from an actual scenario that runs
correctly when not minified. I think what you are showing is that the
code-flow analyzer contributes to the renaming logic. In this actual test
case, someFunction is called from an event handler, so maybe the renaming
Hi,
I canceled the vote for the Mavenizer. As I had to re-write the README, which
still referenced the Mavenizer before my refactoring. I took the chance to
implement a fourth converter module "fontkit" which should deal with the font
related libraries and deploys them seperately.
I'll issue a
13 matches
Mail list logo
