Hacker News Reader

> The problem of minifying is easy enough to avoid

Yes - use a minifier that doesn't break Angular code. Asking me to insert repetitive verbiage isn't an acceptable solution.

View on HN

Sure, whatever, I just don't think it's the real issue with DI in Angular.

I am torn about how minification affects metaprogramming. I don't believe that reducing the delivery footprint should ever effect how the code is interpreted.

On the other hand, if you think of access to argument names as part of the Javascript language, then a "minifier" that threw out that information would by definition not be a Javascript minifier - it would be a minifier of a subset of the language.

lol. i have to laugh at this. it is not normal to write a framework that requires exact argument names in userland code. it is completely strange and unusual for something to break just because an argument name was renamed; this data is theoretically private to the function. The only reason this is not the case in Angular is because of the insane hack of stringifying functions. This is a violation of how things are designed and assumed to work in JavaScript. You don’t run functions by toStringing them and eval-ing them; you just call them... anything else is an experiment, not a supported use.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com