Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #26949 > unrolled thread

Re: LINK: AutoPacker - JavaScript compression for the lazy.

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.javascript

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: LINK: AutoPacker - JavaScript compression for the lazy. Chris White <0ntariokingston@gmail.com> - 2015-02-27 13:36 -0800
    Re: LINK: AutoPacker - JavaScript compression for the lazy. "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-02-28 10:06 +0100
      Re: LINK: AutoPacker - JavaScript compression for the lazy. MASTER TROLL BAIT <0ntariokingston@gmail.com> - 2015-03-14 21:33 -0700

#26949 — Re: LINK: AutoPacker - JavaScript compression for the lazy.

On Tuesday, November 20, 2007 at 9:28:20 AM UTC-5, -Lost wrote:
> This was in a 9 Rules feed that I just noticed today.  Might be of some 
> use.  Developed in PHP, but I'm sure it could easily be ported.
> 
> http://www.thepcspy.com/read/autopacker__optimise_your_javascript
> 
> -- 
> -Lost
> Remove the extra words to reply by e-mail.  Don't e-mail me.  I am 
> kidding.  No I am not.

http://www.scriptcompress.com/JavaScript-Packers.htm you can just compress your stuff, even better for lazy as you do not have to set anything up in PHP as it's ready to use....

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#26950

Chris White <0ntariokingston@gmail.com> wrote on 27 feb 2015 in
comp.lang.javascript: 

> http://www.scriptcompress.com/JavaScript-Packers.htm you can just
> compress your stuff, even better for lazy as you do not have to set
> anything up in PHP as it's ready to use.... 

I doubt that,
as for ready-to-use there must be a valid use.

Perhaps you don't understand the concept of my lazyness.

If there is one small picture on a webpage,
the load-gain in speed by packing 
even large JS-scripts is relatively minimal,
and the packing/unpacking overhead is not. 

Perhaps you have 75 baud dial-in connections in mind?

So please don't bother us, imho, anymore.

-- 
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#27040

On Saturday, February 28, 2015 at 4:06:54 AM UTC-5, Evertjan. wrote:
> Chris White <0ntariokingston@gmail.com> wrote on 27 feb 2015 in
> comp.lang.javascript: 
> 
> > http://www.scriptcompress.com/JavaScript-Packers.htm you can just
> > compress your stuff, even better for lazy as you do not have to set
> > anything up in PHP as it's ready to use.... 
> 
> I doubt that,
> as for ready-to-use there must be a valid use.
> 
> Perhaps you don't understand the concept of my lazyness.
> 
> If there is one small picture on a webpage,
> the load-gain in speed by packing 
> even large JS-scripts is relatively minimal,
> and the packing/unpacking overhead is not. 
> 
> Perhaps you have 75 baud dial-in connections in mind?
> 
> So please don't bother us, imho, anymore.
> 
> -- 
> Evertjan.
> The Netherlands.
> (Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

No bother, thanks.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.javascript

csiph-web