Hi, > As it stands now, use of constants result in more JS code after compiled.
Debug yes but not optimised / release. > It’s possible that this can be optimized, but currently the most efficient JS > code is produced if using string literals rather than constants. (The Google > compiler created variables for string literals used more than once.) That's not we found in a previous thread on this list, the google compiler optimises the constants and there is no penalty in using them. You mind provide examples that show the above is the actually case and document it on the wiki? My vote would be not the duplicate the strings everywhere and use constants as there is no cost and increased safety. Thanks, Justin
