3 ms·
This. There’s zero sense in using 1:1 replacements of jQuery nowadays since jQuery already has a slim version. If you want to drop jQuery, you have to rethink
by q-rews 5y ago
This. There’s zero sense in using 1:1 replacements of jQuery nowadays since jQuery already has a slim version.
If you want to drop jQuery, you have to rethink the code.
- fabiospampinato 5y agoCash's maintainer here. IMO it could be worth for some use cases to use a replacement for jQuery, for the record Cash is ~75% (~20kb minified and gzipped less) smaller than jQuery Slim, that isn't/shouldn't be a rounding error for many use cases.
- vmception 5y agoThese are good points, people are more so taking issue with the title. I was expecting a tool that just tells me how to do something in Javascript - without any library - that I would be tempted to use just include jQuery for. Instead I'm presented with a library. I expected the comment sections to be talking about how AI/ML crowdsourced code aggregators keep messing up, instead I'm reading about a simple additional convenience library that a contractor wrote for themselves, and described wrong.