最好的 JavaScript 压缩器
最好的 JavaScript 压缩器是什么？ 我正在寻找一种工具：
- 易于使用
- 具有高压缩率
- 产生可靠的最终结果（不会弄乱代码）
如果你对这篇内容有疑问，欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论，获取更多帮助，或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。
绑定邮箱获取回复消息
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱，如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论，将不能在第一时间通知您！
最好的 JavaScript 压缩器是什么？ 我正在寻找一种工具：
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱，如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论，将不能在第一时间通知您！
接受 或继续使用网站，即表示您同意使用 Cookies 和您的相关数据。
发布评论
评论（13）
Js Crush 是一个很好的压缩器，可以在缩小后使用。
Js Crush is a good compressor to use after you have minified.
KJScompress
http://opensource.seznam.cz/KJScompress/index.html html
KJScompress
http://opensource.seznam.cz/KJScompress/index.html
bananascript.com 曾经给我最好的结果。
bananascript.com used to give me best results.
这里是一个 YUI 压缩器脚本 (Byuic) 查找路径下的所有 js 和 css 并压缩/（可选）混淆他们。 很高兴集成到构建过程中。
Here is a YUI compressor script (Byuic) that finds all the js and css down a path and compresses /(optionally) obfuscates them. Nice to integrate into a build process.
JSMin 是另一个。
JSMin is another one.
这是 HttpHandler 的源代码，它也许可以做到这一点它会帮助你
Here's the source code of an HttpHandler which does that, maybe it'll help you
我最近发布了 UglifyJS，一个用 JavaScript 编写的 JavaScript 压缩器（运行在 NodeJS Node.js 平台，但它可以轻松修改为在任何 JavaScript 引擎上运行，因为它不需要任何 <代码>Node.js内部）。 它比 YUI Compressor 和 Google Closure，它的压缩效果比 YUI 在我测试过的所有脚本上，它比 Closure 更安全（知道处理“eval”或“with”）。
除了删除空格之外，UglifyJS 还执行以下操作：
foo["bar"]转换为foo.barPS：哦，它还可以“美化”。 ;-)
I recently released UglifyJS, a JavaScript compressor which is written in JavaScript (runs on the NodeJS Node.js platform, but it can be easily modified to run on any JavaScript engine, since it doesn't need any
Node.jsinternals). It's a lot faster than both YUI Compressor and Google Closure, it compresses better than YUI on all scripts I tested it on, and it's safer than Closure (knows to deal with "eval" or "with").Other than whitespace removal, UglifyJS also does the following:
foo["bar"]intofoo.barwhere possiblePS: Oh, it can "beautify" as well. ;-)
尝试 JSMin，获得了 C#、Java、C 和其他端口，并且也随时可用。
Try JSMin, got C#, Java, C and other ports and readily available too.
YUI 压缩机 就是最佳选择。 它具有很高的压缩率，经过充分测试，并在许多顶级网站中使用，并且是我个人推荐的。
我已经将它用于我的项目，没有出现任何 JavaScript 错误或问题。 而且它有很好的文档。
我从未使用过它的 CSS 压缩功能，但它们也存在。CSS 压缩也同样有效。注意：虽然 Dean Edwards 的 /packer/ 实现了比 YUI Compressor 更好的压缩率，但我运行使用它时遇到一些 JavaScript 错误。
YUI Compressor is the way to go. It has a great compression rate, is well tested and is in use among many top sites, and, well, personally recommended by me.
I've used it for my projects without a single JavaScript error or hiccup. And it has nice documentation.
I've never used its CSS compression capabilities, but they exist as well.CSS compression works just as well.Note: Although Dean Edwards's /packer/ achieves a better compression rate than YUI Compressor, I ran into a few JavaScript errors when using it.
我使用 Dojo 项目中的 ShrinkSafe - 它很特殊，因为它实际上使用了JavaScript 解释器（Rhino）用于处理在代码中查找符号并了解其范围等。有助于确保代码在从另一端出来时能够正常工作，而不是许多使用正则表达式执行相同操作的压缩工具（这不那么可靠）。
我实际上有一个 MSBuild 任务
编辑：顺便说一句，“最佳”是有争议的，因为“最佳”的标准会根据项目的需求而变化。 就我个人而言，我认为 ShrinkSafe 是一个很好的平衡； 对于一些认为最小尺寸==最好的人来说，这是不够的。
编辑：值得注意的是，YUI 压缩器也使用 Rhino。
I use ShrinkSafe from the Dojo project - it is exceptional because it actually uses a JavaScript interpreter (Rhino) to deal with finding symbols in the code and understanding their scope, etc. which helps to ensure that the code will work when it comes out the other end, as opposed to a lot of compression tools which use regex to do the same (which is not as reliable).
I actually have an MSBuild task in a Web Deployment Project in my current Visual Studio solution that runs a script which in turn runs all of the solution's JS files through ShrinkSafe before we deploy and it works quite well.
EDIT: By the way, "best" is open to debate, since the criteria for "best" will vary depending on the needs of the project. Personally, I think ShrinkSafe is a good balance; for some people that think smallest size == best, it will be insufficient.
EDIT: It is worth noting that the YUI compressor also uses Rhino.
如果您使用 Packer，只需使用“收缩变量”选项并对生成的代码进行 gzip 压缩即可。 base62 选项仅适用于您的服务器无法发送 gzip 压缩文件的情况。 具有“shrink vars”的 Packer 可以更好地压缩 YUI，但如果您在某处跳过了分号，则可能会引入错误。
base62 基本上是一个穷人的 gzip，这就是为什么 gzip 压缩 base62 代码比 gzip 压缩收缩 var 代码提供更大的文件。
If you use Packer, just go far the 'shrink variables' option and gzip the resulting code. The base62 option is only for if your server cannot send gzipped files. Packer with 'shrink vars' achieves better compression the YUI, but can introduce bugs if you've skipped a semicolon somewhere.
base62 is basically a poor man's gzip, which is why gzipping base62-ed code gives you bigger files than gzipping shrink-var-ed code.
几年后重新审视这个问题， UglifyJS 似乎是目前最好的选择。
如下所述，它在 NodeJS 平台上运行，但可以轻松修改以在任何 JavaScript 引擎上运行。
--- 下面的旧答案 ---
Google 发布了 Closure Compiler到目前为止，这似乎生成了最小的文件 此处和此处
在此之前的各种选项如下
基本上Packer 在初始压缩方面做得更好，但是如果您要在在线发送之前对文件进行 gzip（您应该这样做）YUI Compressor 获得最小的最终大小。
顺便说一句，测试是在 jQuery 代码上完成的。
@daniel james 在评论中提及 compressorrater 显示 Packer 在最佳压缩方面领先图表，所以我猜 ymmv
Revisiting this question a few years later, UglifyJS, seems to be the best option as of now.
As stated below, it runs on the NodeJS platform, but can be easily modified to run on any JavaScript engine.
--- Old answer below---
Google released Closure Compiler which seems to be generating the smallest files so far as seen here and here
Previous to that the various options were as follow
Basically Packer does a better job at initial compression , but if you are going to gzip the files before sending on the wire (which you should be doing) YUI Compressor gets the smallest final size.
The tests were done on jQuery code btw.
@daniel james mentions in the comment compressorrater which shows Packer leading the chart in best compression, so I guess ymmv