4 ms·
Bootstrap at least provides a way to pull in only components that you need. I would argue for a more modular jQuery. There are some projects that don't require
by hw 9y ago
Bootstrap at least provides a way to pull in only components that you need. I would argue for a more modular jQuery.
There are some projects that don't require all that jQuery provides, and sometimes you want to min-max performance and size of JS that gets downloaded.
Keep in mind that jQuery is maintained and contributed to by more than 16 developers so you are technically sourcing things from multiple developers, just so happens they are in a single library.
Again, it really depends on what you're doing with your project and what you need for your project. Most developers include jQuery by default because it's just the most common and most used library, and PlainJS offers an alternative which I think is great.
- currysausage 9y agoWhat I'm looking for: libraries instead of one-size-fits-all frameworks. Libraries annotated for Closure Compiler's advanced compilation mode, so I can automatically tree-shake all the code that I don't need.
- m_mueller 9y agoCould you give a common example from jQuery core that could be left away? I'd hate if I find a documentation about a method for a jQuery object only to find out that I don't have that extension yet. IMO its size is just about right.