blocks|key|1199483|text|“无论你找到哪个最适合你的”，我认为这是目前的普遍答案-+YUI已经存在的时间更长了，所以毫无疑问，它将是目前公认的最好的工具。而闭包对我们来说是新的--所以没有像YUI那样丰富的闭包经验。因此，我认为你不会仅仅因为闭包是新的，就根据人们的经验找到一个令人信服的理由来解释为什么要使用闭包。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|1199484|这并不是说你不应该使用Closure....just，我的意思是，我不认为这个问题的答案是可用的，直到许多人使用了2并对它们进行了比较。|1199485|编辑:有几个早期的比较，说闭包确实带来了改进：http://blog.feedly.com/2009/11/06/google-closure-vs-yui-min/|offset|length|1199486|http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=924426|1199487|进一步编辑:值得关注关闭的问题列表：http://code.google.com/p/closure-compiler/issues/list|1199488|entityMap|0|LINK|mutability|MUTABLE|url|http://blog.feedly.com/2009/11/06/google-closure-vs-yui-min/|1|2|http://code.google.com/p/closure-compiler/issues/list^0|0|0|N|1O|0|0|0|16|1|0|I|1H|2|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|W|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|X|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|E|5|6|7|Y|8|@]|9|@$F|Z|G|10|1|11]]|A|$]]|$1|H|3|I|5|6|7|12|8|@]|9|@$F|13|G|14|1|15]]|A|$]]|$1|J|3|K|5|6|7|16|8|@]|9|@$F|17|G|18|1|19]]|A|$]]|$1|L|3|-4|5|6|7|1A|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|M|$N|$5|O|P|Q|A|$R|S]]|T|$5|O|P|Q|A|$R|I]]|U|$5|O|P|Q|A|$R|V]]]]

"Whichever you find best for you" I think is the general answer at the moment - YUI has been available longer so undoubtedly will be the one which currently has the consensus as being the best tool. Whereas Closure is new to us - so there isn't the wealth of experience with Closure as there is with YUI. Hence I don't think you'd find a compelling real-world arguments of why to use Closure based on people's experiences with it simply because it's new.

That's not to say you shouldn't use Closure....just my round about way of saying, I don't think there's an answer available to this until a number of people have used the 2 and compared them.

Edit:
There are a couple of early comparisons, saying Closure does give an improvement:
<a href="http://blog.feedly.com/2009/11/06/google-closure-vs-yui-min/" rel="noreferrer">http://blog.feedly.com/2009/11/06/google-closure-vs-yui-min/</a> 
<a href="http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=924426" rel="noreferrer">http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=924426</a>

Further Edit:
Worth keeping an eye on issue list for Closure: <a href="http://code.google.com/p/closure-compiler/issues/list" rel="noreferrer">http://code.google.com/p/closure-compiler/issues/list</a>

blocks|key|1199579|text|闭包可以在简单模式或高级模式中使用。简单模式对于大多数JavaScript代码来说是相当安全的，因为它只重命名函数中的局部变量以获得进一步的压缩。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|1199580|高级模式更具侵略性。它将重命名对象文字中的键，如果它可以确定内联函数调用返回没有副作用的简单值，则重命名这些键。|1199581|例如：|1199582|function+Foo()
{
++return+"hello";
}

alert(Foo());|code-block|syntax|javascript|1199583|翻译为：|1199584|alert("hello");|1199585|这段代码是：|1199586|var+o+=+{First:+"Mike",+Last:+"Koss"};
alert(o);|1199587|1199588|alert({a:"Mike",b:"Koss"});|1199589|您可以通过引用以下名称来防止高级模式更改对象文字中的键值：|1199590|{'First':+"Mike",+'Last':+"Koss"}|1199591|您可以在谷歌的交互式Closure+Compiler+site上尝试这些和其他示例。|offset|length|1199592|entityMap|0|LINK|mutability|MUTABLE|url|http://closure-compiler.appspot.com/home^0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|A|L|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|1B|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|1C|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|E|5|6|7|1D|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|F|3|G|5|H|7|1E|8|@]|9|@]|A|$I|J]]|$1|K|3|L|5|6|7|1F|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|M|3|N|5|H|7|1G|8|@]|9|@]|A|$I|J]]|$1|O|3|P|5|6|7|1H|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|Q|3|R|5|H|7|1I|8|@]|9|@]|A|$I|J]]|$1|S|3|L|5|6|7|1J|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|T|3|U|5|H|7|1K|8|@]|9|@]|A|$I|J]]|$1|V|3|W|5|6|7|1L|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|X|3|Y|5|H|7|1M|8|@]|9|@]|A|$I|J]]|$1|Z|3|10|5|6|7|1N|8|@]|9|@$11|1O|12|1P|1|1Q]]|A|$]]|$1|13|3|-4|5|6|7|1R|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|14|$15|$5|16|17|18|A|$19|1A]]]]

Closure can be used in the Simple mode or the Advanced mode. Simple mode is fairly safe for most JavaScript code, as it only renames local variables in functions to get further compression.

Advanced mode is much more aggressive. It will rename keys in object literals, and inline function calls if it can determine that they return simple values with no side effects.

For example:

<pre><code>function Foo()
{
 return "hello";
}

alert(Foo());
</code></pre>

is translated to:

<pre><code>alert("hello");
</code></pre>

And this code:

<pre><code>var o = {First: "Mike", Last: "Koss"};
alert(o);
</code></pre>

is translated to:

<pre><code>alert({a:"Mike",b:"Koss"});
</code></pre>

You can prevent the Advanced mode from changing key values in object literals by quoting the names like this:

<pre><code>{'First': "Mike", 'Last': "Koss"}
</code></pre>

You can try out these and other examples at google's interactive <a href="http://closure-compiler.appspot.com/home" rel="noreferrer">Closure Compiler site</a>.

blocks|key|1199658|text|从我所看到的比较来看，在最小化文件大小方面，闭包似乎是明显的赢家。本文使用三个流行的JS库(jQuery、Prototype、MooTools)来比较YUI+Compressor和Closure+Compiler之间的压缩效果：http://www.bloggingdeveloper.com/post/Closure-Compiler-vs-YUI-Compressor-Comparing-the-Javascript-Compression-Tools.aspx|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|offset|length|data|1199659|Closure在每次测试中都处于领先地位，特别是在高级模式下，它“通过提供近60%25的压缩，将代码大小最小化，比YUI+Compressor多出约20-25%25。”|1199660|entityMap|0|LINK|mutability|MUTABLE|url|http://www.bloggingdeveloper.com/post/Closure-Compiler-vs-YUI-Compressor-Comparing-the-Javascript-Compression-Tools.aspx^0|36|3C|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|N|8|@]|9|@$A|O|B|P|1|Q]]|C|$]]|$1|D|3|E|5|6|7|R|8|@]|9|@]|C|$]]|$1|F|3|-4|5|6|7|S|8|@]|9|@]|C|$]]]|G|$H|$5|I|J|K|C|$L|M]]]]

From the comparisons I've seen, Closure seems to be the clear winner in terms of minimizing file size. This article uses three popular JS libraries (jQuery, Prototype, MooTools) to compare compression between YUI Compressor and Closure Compiler:
<a href="http://www.bloggingdeveloper.com/post/Closure-Compiler-vs-YUI-Compressor-Comparing-the-Javascript-Compression-Tools.aspx" rel="noreferrer">http://www.bloggingdeveloper.com/post/Closure-Compiler-vs-YUI-Compressor-Comparing-the-Javascript-Compression-Tools.aspx</a>

Closure comes out in front in each test, particularly in its advanced mode, where it "minimizes code size about 20-25% more than YUI Compressor by providing nearly 60% compression."

blocks|key|1414822|text|你可以在这里做一些测试，看看哪种浏览器更好：http://jsperf.com/closure-vs-yui|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|offset|length|data|1414823|entityMap|0|LINK|mutability|MUTABLE|url|http://jsperf.com/closure-vs-yui^0|M|W|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|L|8|@]|9|@$A|M|B|N|1|O]]|C|$]]|$1|D|3|-4|5|6|7|P|8|@]|9|@]|C|$]]]|E|$F|$5|G|H|I|C|$J|K]]]]

You can make some tests here, and see what is better in each browser:
<a href="http://jsperf.com/closure-vs-yui" rel="nofollow">http://jsperf.com/closure-vs-yui</a>

blocks|key|1414898|text|截至2012年10月，YUI压缩器现在似乎已被弃用，或者至少不再在YUI中使用：http://www.yuiblog.com/blog/2012/10/16/state-of-yui-compressor/|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|offset|length|data|1414899|entityMap|0|LINK|mutability|MUTABLE|url|http://www.yuiblog.com/blog/2012/10/16/state-of-yui-compressor/^0|14|1R|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|L|8|@]|9|@$A|M|B|N|1|O]]|C|$]]|$1|D|3|-4|5|6|7|P|8|@]|9|@]|C|$]]]|E|$F|$5|G|H|I|C|$J|K]]]]

As of october 2012, looks like YUI compressor is now deprecated, or at least no longer going to be used in YUI: <a href="http://www.yuiblog.com/blog/2012/10/16/state-of-yui-compressor/" rel="nofollow">http://www.yuiblog.com/blog/2012/10/16/state-of-yui-compressor/</a>

YUI Compressor was the consensus best tool for minimizing, but Closure seems like it could be better.

Should I use the YUI Compressor or the new Google Closure compiler to compress my JavaScript?

jQuery

YUI Compressor是公认的最小化最好的工具，但闭包似乎可以更好。

问我应该使用YUI Compressor还是新的Google Closure编译器来压缩我的JavaScript？
EN

社区

活动

资源

关于

腾讯云开发者

热门产品

热门推荐

更多推荐

问我应该使用YUI Compressor还是新的Google Closure编译器来压缩我的JavaScript？EN

社区

活动

资源

关于

腾讯云开发者

热门产品

热门推荐

更多推荐

问我应该使用YUI Compressor还是新的Google Closure编译器来压缩我的JavaScript？
EN