On 01/21/2011 08:21 AM, Chad wrote: > While I happen to think the licensing issue is rather bogus and > doesn't really affect us, I'm glad to see it resolved. It outperforms > our current solution and keeps the same behavior. Plus as a bonus, > the vertical line smushing is configurable so if we want to argue > about \n a year from now, we can :)
Ideally we will be using closures by then and since it rewrites functions, variable names and sometimes collapses multi-line functionality, new line preservation will be a mute point. Furthermore, Google even has a nice add-on to firebug [1] for source code mapping. Making the dead horse even more dead. I feel like we are suck back in time, arguing about optimising code that came out eons ago in net time ( more than 7 years ago ) There are more modern solutions that take into consideration these concerns and do a better job at it. ( ie not just a readable line but a pointer back to the line of source code that is of concern ) [1] http://code.google.com/closure/compiler/docs/inspector.html peace, --michael _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
