Why use _prelude instead of prelude? about browser-pack HOT 5 CLOSED

FYI, I use this (rather verbose) workaround to get an un-minified prelude (with grunt-browserify):

options: {
  …
  prelude: grunt.file.read("./node_modules/grunt-browserify/node_modules/browserify/node_modules/browser-pack/prelude.js")
  …
}

(shorten the path and use fs.readFileSync if you're using browser-pack directly). I find an un-minified prelude handy when debugging a require() call, especially when your bundle setup gets complicated.

Would a simpler flag like to use prelude.js rather than _prelude.js be worth a PR? e.g. devPrelude: true

from browser-pack.

I agree that an option to have prelude not minified would be very much welcome.

from browser-pack.

People want to see their own code when they open up the bundle file, not browserify's code. A tiny blob of pre-minified data stays out of the way.

from browser-pack.

Ok, makes sense. Thanks for the explanation!

from browser-pack.

@aearly Thanks for the tip.

Would a simpler flag like to use prelude.js rather than _prelude.js be worth a PR? e.g. devPrelude: true

Yes. Not sure on the specifics, but there should be an option that can be passed to browserify. FYI, when using browserify's standalone option, the UMD prelude is also minified. So that interferes with debugging and it also actually breaks the bundle when the unminified browser pack prelude is used (due to ASI after a return I think).

from browser-pack.