You should always keep a copy of the uncompressed file. Then if you have a problem, just publish, test and change the uncompressed one, then republish it in the compressed form. Why should others suffer by having extra coding in FireBug, just because you are short-sighted? The developers would also waste their precious time for a fully superfluous feature. That could also introduce extra errors. You should not have to waste "extra cycles" if you just replace the compressed file with the uncompressed one.
On Oct 6, 5:08 pm, "Jay Merrifield" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ya, but if you've already pushed compressed javascript to a production > service, and you want to quickly diagnose a problem, it would be a > nice feature to have instead of wasting some cycles trying to recreate > the problem on a development box with uncompressed javascript. > > Jay > > > > On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 4:46 AM, Rako <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > If they are your files, then change the editor/uploader not to > > compress the javasript files. > > If they belong to someone else, whom you cannot ask to give you an > > uncompressed version, than you should not play with these. > > If there is an error, then report it to the site's webmaster. If you > > just want to copy their code without their permission than there is > > one word for it. > > > On Oct 5, 8:39 pm, "Jay Merrifield" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I'd also like to see an option that would improve the formatting of > >> compressed javascript files. I'm mainly having issues with javascript > >> files that have had all carriage returns and indentation removed, > >> makes adding break points extremely hard. > > >> Jay > > >> On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 2:36 PM, Jay Merrifield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > I'd like to see a javascript tab next to the DOM tab that would take > >> > all the user-defined javascript functions and list them there. Would > >> > make locating and managing them much easier. > > >> > Jay > > >> > On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 6:03 AM, splintor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> >> I have several wishes, but is there a reason to use this thread > >> >> instead of the issue tracker: > >> >>http://code.google.com/p/fbug/issues/list?q=label:ui > > >> >> splintor > > >> >> On Oct 2, 3:41 pm, Rob Campbell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >>> Hi Firebuggists, > > >> >>> We're having some discussion about what works and what could be > >> >>> improved upon in the Firebug UI. Here's an opportunity to vent your > >> >>> frustration or pet-peeves about what you don't like about the UI. What > >> >>> do you think should be changed or improved-upon the most? If you have > >> >>> suggestions on how to improve it, even better. > > >> >>> Thanks! > >> >>> Rob "pyroentomologist" Campbell- Hide quoted text - > > >> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Firebug" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/firebug?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
