Maybe you should try reading the article before you complain about it. Now maybe it's because I didn't use the command line flavors and instead was using the online "services", but I was unable to get that "a, b, c" output you have there. Much less what type of "minification" is that when it's basically the same amount of code AND would not actually gzip as efficiently. (single latter replacement actually gzips poorly)

And seriously, if one has to dick around "configuring" something as simple as a code minifier, that would still qualify as "try hard" to the point of byte obsession. If you have to screw around setting "options" just to have it handle valid code? Well...

I guess that's to be expected from the "wah wah teh side uffects" crowd of nose breathing half-tweets. The type of "clean code" rubbish that sharts on performance, code clarity, and does nothing but return us to 1980's style spaghetti.

The mere existence of a "side_effects" configuration option supports my supposition that it's all trying way too hard for the type of pointless arbitrary pedantry that makes garbage like linters do more harm than good.