should not process comment scripts?

[JohnnyFee]

When I comment some sciprts in index.html:

<!-- build:js({.tmp,client}) app/app.js -->
<script src="app/app.js"></script>

<!-- Mock Code
<script src="components/mock.js"></script>
-->

<!-- endbuild -->

I use useminPrepare to generate the config, and then run the generated tasks. But the concated file will include the commented scripts components/mock.js, this is a bug?

But when I rewite the comment as a line:

<!-- Mock Code <script src="components/mock.js"></script>-->

The commented file will not included in concated file.

My config is:

// Reads HTML for usemin blocks to enable smart builds that automatically
    // concat, minify and revision files. Creates configurations in memory so
    // additional tasks can operate on them
    useminPrepare: {
      html: ['<%= yeoman.app %>/index.html'],
      options: {
        dest: '<%= yeoman.dist %>/public'
      }
    },

    // Performs rewrites based on rev and the useminPrepare configuration
    usemin: {
      html: ['<%= yeoman.dist %>/public/{,*/}*.html'],
      css: ['<%= yeoman.dist %>/public/{,*/}*.css'],
      js: ['<%= yeoman.dist %>/public/{,*/}*.js'],
      options: {
        assetsDirs: [
          '<%= yeoman.dist %>/public',
          '<%= yeoman.dist %>/public/app',
          '<%= yeoman.dist %>/public/assets/images'
        ],
        // This is so we update image references in our ng-templates
        patterns: {
          js: [
            [/(assets\/images\/.*?\.(?:gif|jpeg|jpg|png|webp|svg))/gm, 'Update the JS to reference our revved images']
          ]
        }
      }
    },

[jmaister]

I have found the same problem when commenting a JS file like this:

<!-- build:js scripts1.js -->
...
<!-- <script src="libs/angular/angular.js"></script> -->
...
<!-- endbuild -->

The file gets added to the result script even that it is commented.

[marcobiedermann]

👍

[ghost]

i found it either, it is a big hole
usemin with concat your comment js
so you have to delete it not comment it

[arthurvr]

Confirmed. This will be hard to fix tho, as we're using regexps to parse our HTML. This would be fixed by #244 (using an actual parser instead of regexps).

[stephanebachelier]

@JohnnyFee and others. I will come back to you soon as I'm already working on using an HTML parser.

[stephanebachelier]

Work is done in #544 and might be merged into dev branch.