google-closure-compiler

问题 I have an app in ClojureScript, which uses Google's Closure Compiler as a compiler backend. The resulting bundle using advanced optimizations seems way too big for what it is. I blame the dependencies but how do I find out which modules are taking the most bytes in the output bundle? I scanned through all the Closure Compiler options and didn't find anything useful. Then I tried to learn about source maps and use that to calculate individual module size but with no success. I would like a

问题 I have a complex dojo app that works correctly uncompiled, but after compiling with Google's Closure Compiler, I get subtle differences in some behaviours. As it is, it's exceedingly difficult to debug, and I've been unable to find any information about possible functional differences between compiled and uncompiled Javascript with Google Closure. Can anyone point me in the direction of known differences, or share any similar experiences and some ideas of where to start looking? 回答1: General

问题 I'm trying to get KineticJS to work with Google Closure Compiler. KineticJS, however, generated it's getters & setters based on the name of the variables. Something like this: // add getter and setter methods Kinetic.Node.addSetters = function(constructor, arr) { for(var n = 0; n < arr.length; n++) { var attr = arr[n]; this._addSetter(constructor, attr); } }; Kinetic.Node.addGetters = function(constructor, arr) { for(var n = 0; n < arr.length; n++) { var attr = arr[n]; this._addGetter

问题 I'm trying to get KineticJS to work with Google Closure Compiler. KineticJS, however, generated it's getters & setters based on the name of the variables. Something like this: // add getter and setter methods Kinetic.Node.addSetters = function(constructor, arr) { for(var n = 0; n < arr.length; n++) { var attr = arr[n]; this._addSetter(constructor, attr); } }; Kinetic.Node.addGetters = function(constructor, arr) { for(var n = 0; n < arr.length; n++) { var attr = arr[n]; this._addGetter

问题 I'm using a design pattern that uses the return statement to expose public class methods. Problem is: I'm getting a lot of JSC_INEXISTENT_PROPERTY warnings in Closure Compiler's Advanced mode, which makes it difficult to check the warnings that actually matter. Example of the pattern I use: // ==ClosureCompiler== // @compilation_level ADVANCED_OPTIMIZATIONS // ==/ClosureCompiler== /** * @constructor */ var MyClass = function() { var someFunc = function(myString) { console.log(myString); }

问题 Introduction I use Google Closure Compiler frequently for compressing my JavaScript files. Now, it seems to compress my code fairly well. Now, I try to make a habit of storing the this object in a local variable, because this cannot be obfuscated, but a local variable certainly can be obfuscated. However, Google Closure Compiler does not recognize this, and instead removes all instances of the local variable, replacing it with this . Regarding optimization... I am well aware that one should

问题 Suppose you are working in a javascript project with several external library dependencies, and want to compile your sources using the Google Closure Compiler in ADVANCED_OPTIMIZATIONS mode. Since in this mode the compiler will rename your code calls to the external libraries objects and functions, you must provide externs, to prevent this renaming from happening. But, it is a lot of work to produce the externs by hand, so, what is the best way to auto-generate the appropriate extern from a

问题 Is it possible to use the closure compiler to remove unused parts of jQuery? I have a script which only uses jQuery's networking (json) functions, and I'd like a minified script which removes everything else. I've tried invoking it with: java -jar compiler.jar --compilation_level=ADVANCED_OPTIMIZATIONS --js=jquery-latest.js --js=my_script.js --js_output_file=out.js But I end up with a file no smaller than the regular minified jQuery source. Edit: I should mention the reason behind this. This

问题 I have some code that looks like this: var MyObject = function () { this.Prop1 = ""; this.Prop2 = []; this.Prop3 = {}; this.Prop4 = 0; } And then I later have this: var SomeObject = new MyObject(); When I run my code through closure compiler in advanced mode, I'm getting the warning dangerous use of the global this object on every line where I have this.Prop = What am I doing that's "dangerous" and how should I rewrite my code? Thanks for your suggestions. 回答1: I would recommend writing it

问题 I have a Node.js project that I want to compile with Closure Compiler. I do not want it to run in the browser/use browserify. I mainly want the utility of type checking. I originally got the compiler to work correctly using the following: java -jar compiler.jar -W VERBOSE --language_in ECMASCRIPT5_STRICT --externs closure-externs.js --js="lib/**.js" Where closure-externs.js manually defined variables and functions which I was using from Node.js in a rather crude way: // closure-externs.js /**