3 ms·
There's no need to complicate static sites with jQuery. All it does can be achieved with vanilla.
by snemvalts 6y ago
There's no need to complicate static sites with jQuery. All it does can be achieved with vanilla.
- cphoover 6y agoI tend to agree, and unless you have to support like IE prior to IE9 it will probably easily support all of your target browsers.
- WhyCause 6y agoPromises aren't available in IE11, and as the last "true" IE, I imagine it'll be around a bit longer than it should be. I recently had to rewrite a bunch of vanilla promise-based code to use jQuery promises once I realized IE11 didn't work.
- cookingmyserver 6y agoVanilla has always been able to do what jQuery can, otherwise jQuery wouldn't exist. It all depends on what your threshold for abstraction and verbosity is. That is going to depend on what you are doing and who you are.
- Turing_Machine 6y agoExactly. I mean, all you really need is a Turing Machine, but they're not very pleasant to program. Same thing with vanilla JS and jQuery.
- labster 6y agoAs a competitive code golfer, I can confidently say that vanilla JS has never offered the raw performance of jQuery.
- colejohnson66 6y ago> All it does can be achieved with vanilla. Well, yes. Every JS library can be written in vanilla JS. The point of jQuery, React, etc. is to make it easier for the programmer to reason about what is going on while avoiding bugs.