3 ms·

Seems like it would be interesting to use as a cheap form of JS obfuscation.

• CWIZO 13y ago
  Even 'alert(1)' produces over 500 chars. Imagine running a proper app trough this. It's hardly cheap.
  • k__ 13y ago
    It's probably easier (and much smaller) to put all js in a file, convert it to a data-URI and add it into the html.
    • CWIZO 13y ago
      That isn't obsfucation though.
      • k__ 13y ago
        I don't know if the stuff mentioned here isn't reversable. I never tried it (just with images), wouldn't this not just show a big blob in the HTML file?
  • aroman 13y ago
    cheap as in stupidly simple, relatively computationally inexpensive and largely ineffective. Not as in having a low storage overhead.
• hrjet 13y ago
  It wouldn't be a good way to obfuscate at all! The step before the eval would be completely decipherable. Also, not cheap!