On Tuesday, May 7, 2013 1:17:36 AM UTC+2, Fitzgerald, Nick wrote:
> * IMO, it is impractical to just take every foo/bar.js and see if there
> is a foo/bar.map because the extra http request overhead
These bar.map files should be checked only if there's no implicit URL provided.
Also, if implicit name would mean renaming lib.js to lib.min, what to do with scripts that don't have names ending in ".js"? Maybe it'd be better just to append ".min", though it would break the current convention of the source map file to lib.min.js to be named lib.min.map, it'd be lib.min.js.map.
> * The possibility exists of adding a new @hasImplicitSourceMap style
> comment directive that would basically say that if the current script is
> foo/bar.js then there should be a source map located at foo/bar.map,
> which would make the whole renaming both the generated js and the source
> map scenario easier to deal with. I'm wary of adding these @ directives
> because once you do they tend to never go away and they have the
> potential to add a bunch of cruft that debugger authors will have to
> deal with. That said, if this is the best solution, then I'm all for it.
Well, the most elegant way would be IMHO to expand the @sourceMappingURL syntax to be able to provide the source file name or even do some basic string operations on it. I understand such a solution would be a problem considering the aim is to have many implementations of reading the source map path so such complications would hamper the adoption speed. Am I right that's the main problem?
P.S. I hope this @ symbol is temporary per our earlier discussion. I think # should be safe though maybe asking sb from the IE team would help, they know their quirks best.