&gt; that was my biggest annoyance with this article<p>Perhaps a core contributor or someone who regularly works on the code-base would have approached it with the full suite of debugging tools available as you mention.<p>However, I get the impression that the author of this article is not one of those and simply wanted to crack open his editor to fix this one problem he saw (and happened to learn more about Atom, Coffeescript and regexps along the way).<p>Being upset over a great open-source contribution because they used &quot;non-ideal&quot; methods to arrive at a solution is just silly.