Domain: jsbeautifier.org
Stories and comments across the archive that link to jsbeautifier.org.
Comments · 8
-
Re:Somebody wants to land some grant $$$...
I actually don't think Google.com home page is all that bad really.
All you need to do is paste the HTML-/JS-source in http://jsbeautifier.org/
After that it's a lot more readable.
-
Re:JavaScript trap
Yeah, and that position is just lunacy. Stallman complains about JS in Google Docs taking half a megabyte, minified. How large would it be unminified, with comments and all? It's not like there aren't any tools to do so if you wish. Fill in the variable names as you please and you should be able to "de-obfuscate" the script quite easily, debug it Firebug or whatever you wish. There is a very clear technical reason for minifying JS, it's beneficial both for the server and the client. While I appreciate some of the foundations laid by Stallman/FSF, nowadays they just seem to be crackpots with no connection to reality (see the this article for example - give a substitute for Youtube as a present, WTF?).
-
Re:Gosh!!!You get code without symbol names and types, and that's assuming the authors hadn't outright obfuscated the code, otherwise you also get an entangled code flow.
For comparison we can paste the minified jQuery code into the excellent deminifier that was suggested in your link and compare the outcome with jQuery's open code; I can't directly paste snippets here because slashdot's lameness filter doesn't want me to.
-
Re:Well...no.
Minified JavaScript ? That isn't too complicated. Just have a look here:
-
Re:De-obfuscated code?
-
Re:Only relevant
Stripping the whitespace saves about 20 kB over the output of jsbeautifier. Gzipping the expanded version saves more than 35 kB over the whitespace-free version (and loses 1 kB to the gzipped whitespace-free version).
So hopefully they are spending more time on the gzipping part.
(jsbeautifier: http://jsbeautifier.org/ )
-
Re:It has external dependancies
Try not to get too hung up on deciding if the name is impossible, it works great.
-
Re:No tab completion!