⬅︎ Back to Comparing Google Closure with UglifyJS
Have you tried comparing the minified sizes after gzipping? This is the real metric because we send our code gzipped (right?). That might gives a different result
Haven't tried yet. Will do when time allows.
Actually, a quick test: $ uglifyjs < maxlength_countdown.js > /tmp/uglify.js$ java -jar ../compiler.jar < maxlength_countdown.js > /tmp/closure.js$ cd /tmp$ emacs uglify.js # remove the preamble comment$ gzip < uglify.js > uglify.js.gz$ gzip < closure.js > closure.js.gz$ ls -ltr-rw-r--r-- 1 peterbe wheel 853 11 Jul 11:23 closure.js-rw-r--r-- 1 peterbe wheel 857 11 Jul 11:23 uglify.js-rw-r--r-- 1 peterbe wheel 408 11 Jul 11:24 closure.js.gz-rw-r--r-- 1 peterbe wheel 405 11 Jul 11:24 uglify.js.gzSo, in this scenario UglifyJS is beaten by 4 bytes but when gzipped it beats Closure by 3 bytes. Shit this is getting really nitpicky and complex at the same time.
Comment
Have you tried comparing the minified sizes after gzipping? This is the real metric because we send our code gzipped (right?). That might gives a different result
Replies
Haven't tried yet. Will do when time allows.
Actually, a quick test:
$ uglifyjs < maxlength_countdown.js > /tmp/uglify.js
$ java -jar ../compiler.jar < maxlength_countdown.js > /tmp/closure.js
$ cd /tmp
$ emacs uglify.js # remove the preamble comment
$ gzip < uglify.js > uglify.js.gz
$ gzip < closure.js > closure.js.gz
$ ls -ltr
-rw-r--r-- 1 peterbe wheel 853 11 Jul 11:23 closure.js
-rw-r--r-- 1 peterbe wheel 857 11 Jul 11:23 uglify.js
-rw-r--r-- 1 peterbe wheel 408 11 Jul 11:24 closure.js.gz
-rw-r--r-- 1 peterbe wheel 405 11 Jul 11:24 uglify.js.gz
So, in this scenario UglifyJS is beaten by 4 bytes but when gzipped it beats Closure by 3 bytes.
Shit this is getting really nitpicky and complex at the same time.