Open GoogleCodeExporter opened 8 years ago
Bumpity bump bump...
This library is now used by enough other libraries (Backbone, coffeescript)
that I think it should be on the CDN too.
Original comment by hansokse...@gmail.com
on 19 Oct 2010 at 10:40
I'd really like to see this added as well.
Although it should be noted that both backbone and coffeescript are made by the
guy responsible for underscore.js
Original comment by rich.la...@googlemail.com
on 25 Oct 2010 at 12:56
Thanks for your support! The jsbin author made an exception because of
Underscore.js's awesomeness and added without a CDN:
http://github.com/remy/jsbin/issues/#issue/32
It still would be nice, though!
Original comment by neb.atkin
on 25 Oct 2010 at 6:16
Original comment by adam.fel...@gtempaccount.com
on 10 Nov 2010 at 11:19
great script, I recommend it be apart of the ajax api
Original comment by kevin.co...@gmail.com
on 27 Jan 2011 at 1:19
Also voted this issue!
Original comment by fabianos...@gmail.com
on 24 Mar 2011 at 3:17
For the record, CoffeeScript doesn't depend on Underscore.js.
... but, Underscore is certainly one of the most depended-on libraries in the
Node.js community:
http://search.npmjs.org/
Original comment by jashkenas
on 24 Mar 2011 at 7:42
Underscore.js and Backbone.js both need to be first-class CDN entries
Original comment by demis.be...@gmail.com
on 24 Mar 2011 at 7:44
Although having small .js files is not ideal from a speed/latency point of
view, so it would it's also a good idea to get a jQuery + Underscore.js +
Backbone.js (jqunback.js) merged bundle which is the ideal starting bundle for
any Backbone.js app. If Google won't do this for us, lets vote it up on
cdnjs.com so they can! http://goo.gl/tJC7v
Original comment by demis.be...@gmail.com
on 25 Mar 2011 at 1:09
I'm -1 on bundling jQuery, underscore, and backbone.
The point of a shared CDN for common resources is to maximize browser cache
hits. By bundling resources together, you create combinatorially more chances
for a cache miss, thus defeating the original purpose. Whether that strategy is
beneficial for media served off of your own site is arguable (depending on what
traffic patterns you want to optimize for), but I don't think a strong case can
be made for Google to do it.
Original comment by dgoul...@gmail.com
on 25 Mar 2011 at 1:18
Bumpzazzlepooh
Original comment by mkre...@gmail.com
on 27 Mar 2011 at 8:31
I'm all for getting this on CDNs.
Original comment by jmtull...@gmail.com
on 27 Mar 2011 at 11:44
[deleted comment]
Bumpity bump bump...
Original comment by hickswri...@gmail.com
on 3 Jun 2011 at 9:08
BUMP.
Original comment by meshachj...@gmail.com
on 1 Oct 2011 at 4:46
bump
Original comment by 4van...@gmail.com
on 26 Oct 2011 at 9:46
This would be great, and you can include the awesome underscore.string too
http://epeli.github.com/underscore.string/
Original comment by sergio...@gmail.com
on 1 Nov 2011 at 6:03
Upvote. Backbone.js while yer at it.
Original comment by buge...@gmail.com
on 17 Dec 2011 at 12:18
Upvote!
Original comment by William....@gmail.com
on 17 Dec 2011 at 8:29
[deleted comment]
upvote!
Original comment by johannes...@socialisten.at
on 4 Jan 2012 at 9:50
Upvote.
Original comment by kir...@hungrytribe.com
on 16 Jan 2012 at 8:14
For anyone looking for an Underscore CDN, try
http://www.cdnjs.com/#/search/underscore
Original comment by hickswri...@gmail.com
on 16 Jan 2012 at 11:48
Upvote!
Original comment by RichardA...@googlemail.com
on 29 Feb 2012 at 4:17
Yes please!
Original comment by eliotj...@gmail.com
on 29 Feb 2012 at 4:30
Seconding comment:23 in suggesting CloudFlare CDN:
http://www.cdnjs.com/
C'mon, this thread is more than a year old. It's not going to happen.
Original comment by sergio...@gmail.com
on 29 Feb 2012 at 5:24
It's truly the appropriate move in Google's quest to stay relevant.
Original comment by zacks...@gmail.com
on 2 Apr 2012 at 6:04
do it.
Original comment by kameron....@gmail.com
on 3 Apr 2012 at 9:58
Yes please do it
Original comment by vishal.4...@gmail.com
on 4 Apr 2012 at 6:39
+1 for this. It's such a common library now.
Original comment by deltaf...@gmail.com
on 23 Apr 2012 at 11:52
Bump.
Original comment by chris.hi...@sagittarius-digital.com
on 17 May 2012 at 11:33
Please stop spamming 500+ subscribers with "+1" comments, we receive an email
update every time. There's this little start on the right from issue title -
just click it to upvote. Not that I expect this to help, but at least is less
annoying.
Original comment by wojtek@oxos.pl
on 17 May 2012 at 11:44
+1 for adding UnderscoreJS to Google CDN! Please add this.
Original comment by soel...@gmail.com
on 11 May 2013 at 5:37
Please add UnderscoreJS.
Original comment by jordanar...@gmail.com
on 22 May 2013 at 8:13
yes please.
Original comment by bmceldow...@gmail.com
on 22 Jun 2013 at 5:37
I found underscore.js is available on cdnjs.cloudflare.com from version 1.2.1
to 1.4.4
http://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/underscore.js/1.4.4/underscore-min.js
Original comment by mr.vass...@gmail.com
on 19 Jul 2013 at 3:03
found the information on stackoverflow in this post
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/9357806/backbone-js-underscore-js-cdn-recomme
ndation
Original comment by mr.vass...@gmail.com
on 19 Jul 2013 at 3:08
FWIW cloudflare is down a lot at least in europe. We are using that underscore
but are just going to serve it directly because of this.
Original comment by joe.mar...@gmail.com
on 19 Jul 2013 at 3:14
pretty pleeease
Original comment by kjetil.m...@gmail.com
on 27 Sep 2013 at 10:20
Bump!
Original comment by g...@gvincent.com
on 24 Nov 2013 at 9:33
BTW, Yandex (another big search engine, popular in Russsia and surrounding
countries) has recently added support for underscore.js & backbone.js to their
own CDN: http://yandex.st
Original comment by ins...@gmail.com
on 25 Nov 2013 at 9:07
Here's another vote for underscore.js!
Original comment by con.anto...@gmail.com
on 11 Jun 2014 at 9:03
[deleted comment]
and another vote
Original comment by jona...@gmail.com
on 17 Feb 2015 at 3:50
Is it still not there after all those years since this issue's been open? Is
there any reason to use Google CDN instead of cdnjs or jsDelivr (which both
have underscore and lodash)? My JavaScript CDN speed test at
https://github.com/rsp/ajax-cdn-speed-test shows cdnjs to be twice as fast as
Google - or is it only in my location?
Original comment by r.poczta...@gmail.com
on 19 Feb 2015 at 2:15
there are people who still use underscore instead of lodash, it shouldn't
encouraged by putting it on google's cdn
Original comment by KGo...@gmail.com
on 12 Mar 2015 at 7:05
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
neb.atkin
on 9 Oct 2010 at 11:18