v3.1 : Uncompressed Files

[__Rich_]

Are the uncompressed versions of the code gone for good?

(if so it's going to make debugging quite a bit more difficult)

[RyanTwilley]

The chrome dev tools are a decent substitute. There's a 'pretty print' button at the bottom (looks like this - {}) that expands the code and updates links to errors, etc. You still have a lot of functions named stuff like '_1cc', but it's somewhat workable.

[__Rich_]

The chrome dev tools are a decent substitute. There's a 'pretty print' button at the bottom (looks like this - {}) that expands the code and updates links to errors, etc. You still have a lot of functions named stuff like '_1cc', but it's somewhat workable.

Thanks, Ryan, yep, pretty-printing does help but it's sooooo much easier to see the un-minified code complete with comments etc.

The reason I was asking is that the zip files are missing some other items (e.g. the handlers) and there were mistakes in the instructions etc. so I was wondering whether this was a deliberate omission or an oversight?

P.S. For Firefox devs try this javascript deminifier, seems to play nicely with Firebug.

[ReneRubalcava]

The ArcGIS JavaScript unbuilt source is not available, and as far as I know has never been available.
There is a posting up at the ideas site for this suggestion though, so go upvote it and let's see what goes from there.
http://ideas.arcgis.com/ideaView?id=087E00000004JOzIAM

[__Rich_]

The ArcGIS JavaScript unbuilt source is not available, and as far as I know has never been available.

Oh really?  What are these then?
[ATTACH=CONFIG]16875[/ATTACH]
Have you ever looked inside the *js.uncompressed.js files?  Have you ever adjusted your default handler to return the uncompressed layer file?

There is a posting up at the ideas site for this suggestion though, so go upvote it and let's see what goes from there.
http://ideas.arcgis.com/ideaView?id=087E00000004JOzIAM

In this case I don't think that should be necessary and I don't think it's the appropriate mechanism.

All this topic needs is a yes/no answer from ESRI at this stage.

[ReneRubalcava]

I always thought that code had already been minified. meaning the var names are obfuscated and comments have been removed. I haven't pulled those before, but now I will, thanks.

No wonder, last dl I have is 2.8 where those files were not included, at least not when I downloaded them. They're in 3.0 though. That's fun.

[__Rich_]

I always thought that code had already been minified. meaning the var names are obfuscated and comments have been removed. But hey, if they were available before then I agree.

I think we're talking about two different things, so my bad.

No worries, that probably means you haven't needed to delve too far into the inner workings...which is a good thing from your perspective! 🙂

(re. Ideas - I'm sure some 'ideas' do get incorporated but I've got a couple that were 'promoted' a couple of years ago that still aren't implemented yet, guess they aren't good enough, still makes me a bit reluctant to bother with that mechanism)