3 ms·

jQuery 3+ minified is 31Kb.... Wtf is the problem with that? Can we just admit that vanilla JS is not ideal and having some abstraction (and tiny bit of page lo

jQuery 3+ minified is 31Kb.... Wtf is the problem with that? Can we just admit that vanilla JS is not ideal and having some abstraction (and tiny bit of page load) is worth it? I am not building web apps that are primary used in Sudan with 1G connection. 31Kb is practically nothing. THIS image is larger than that! http://content.cdn.viber.com/stickers/144/10400/00010400.png http://content.cdn.viber.com/stickers/144/10400/00010400.png

austincheney 6y ago
JQuery is orders of magnitude slower than vanilla JS. It’s not about download time but execution time. I am not deliberately trying to punish my users.
- motogpjimbo 6y ago
  Do you use React? In my experience, people arguing against jQuery are usually simultaneously arguing for React as a replacement for it, and are therefore arguing for replacing a ~30kb library with multi-megabyte bundles of catastrophically broken SPA code.
  - austincheney 6y ago
    I do not, but Angular is worse. Last I looked it’s a 300mb download after installing the npm dependencies.
  - iaml 6y ago
    Why do you think you can only write multi-megabyte apps with react? And why do you think those two are the only options? You can write decently sized react code that's 300-500 kb bundled and if you're not ok with that you can start dynamically loading dependecies. Companies just choose to not spend any time optimizing it.