Crockford on Bootstrap's semicolon omission: “insanely stupid code”

Re:Crockford on Bootstrap's semicolon omission: “insanely st... by underwater on Sunday April 15, 2012 @01:18AM (#3842873)

Not required doesn't necessarily mean it's a good idea.

If they were never needed I'd understand, but sometimes they are. I don't see the point in forcing the developer to make a conscious decision on whether to include a semicolon.

Omitting semicolons also means that the correctness of a line of code is determined by the unrelated lines that follow.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Crockford on Bootstrap's semicolon omission: “insanely st... by groovy2shoes on Sunday April 15, 2012 @01:29AM (#3842897)

While the virtues of semicolon insertion are highly debatable, developers are permitted by the ECMAScript standard to write code that relies on it. A tool like JSMin should be aware of semicolon insertion. ricardobeat put it very well elsewhere in this thread: "It is a bug on JSMin. Minifying should never alter code behaviour."

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Crockford on Bootstrap's semicolon omission: “insanely st... by ars on Sunday April 15, 2012 @02:55PM (#3844341)

Actually JSMin is aware of semicolon insertion and handles it correctly.

They just disagree on whether a semicolon gets inserted here.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Crockford on Bootstrap's semicolon omission: “insanely st... by groovy2shoes on Sunday April 15, 2012 @03:47PM (#3844503)

Unfortunately for JSMin, browsers attempt to implement at least the ECMAScript specification, not just "the good parts."

[ Parent | on HN ]