61–70 of 162 posts
For the sake of 25KB for the full Lodash library, is it really going to make much difference? That size will be eclipsed by just a single small image on your website. Development is all about tradeoffs. Liberal use of Lodash can make for clean code that abstracts away subtle browser differences. For a small download size it sounds like a great tradeoff to me.
Instead of searching for the compatibility of each individual function I would much rather just use a custom build of Lodash with the collection of functions I need (which can even be handled by your build process now and some tree shaking). And I get a lot of utility functions with it too that I use a lot like Throttle and Debounce.
The need for Lodash and Underscore is diminishing, but not because of JS getting native support for a subset of utilities, but because there are already better alternatives. Utility libraries like Ramda[1] or pointfree-fantasy[2] with related modules which offer a better support for FP idioms and more useful higher-order functions are what made me drop Underscore. I think that, with a language with such tiny stdlib,…
The Ramda API changes with every version. If you don't pay attention for a few months and accidentally upgrade (Ramda doesn't seem to want to do Semver, I'm not sure why), then suddenly half your code is broken. We depend heavily on Ramda and I like its API better than Lodash and friends (it's more guessable, more consistent), but with the changes it keeps having I regret choosing it. Our core product is currently on…
Getting rid of unnecessary dependencies can have a huge impact on site download performance, especially on mobile. Even in the case of having the site cached, every resource you link will have to perform an HTTP request to at least receive NOT-MODIFIED. It can add up, especially if you're on a semi-spotty connection and trigger TCP congestion avoidance.
Don't miss the forest for the trees. Re-implementing _.forEach, _.map, and _.reduce to do something like loop over objects yourself is going to most likely end up taking more code than just using those functions from lodash. Not to mention that you most likely won't have the same amount of testing, speed/optimization, or "familiarity" across devs with a home-grown solution. Yeah, don't pull in lodash if you are makin…
The need for Lodash and Underscore is diminishing, but not because of JS getting native support for a subset of utilities, but because there are already better alternatives. Utility libraries like Ramda[1] or pointfree-fantasy[2] with related modules which offer a better support for FP idioms and more useful higher-order functions are what made me drop Underscore. I think that, with a language with such tiny stdlib,…
The Ramda API changes with every version. If you don't pay attention for a few months and accidentally upgrade (Ramda doesn't seem to want to do Semver, I'm not sure why), then suddenly half your code is broken. We depend heavily on Ramda and I like its API better than Lodash and friends (it's more guessable, more consistent), but with the changes it keeps having I regret choosing it. Our core product is currently on…
From my personal experience, I got very good results using LiveScript with its default Prelude.ls lib. LS supports nearly all FP-related constructs and syntax known from many other languages, and Prelude.ls, while smaller than Ramda, is quite complete, too. That's not for every project, though: introducing another language is a bigger risk than introducing a single library.
I understand why, and once upon a time I was the guy who would commit code where I replaced jQuery and underscore (at the time) calls with native calls. It works, and is totally fine. But what was the point? Some kind of optimization? It was pretty pointless in hindsight and just made my coworkers trouble. Now all my JS code is Ramda/lodash all the way, and it's great (although I opt for Clojure/script when possible)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Didn't someone do a study and found that cache hit rates for CDNs were in the 10-20% range? You might be better off bundling lodash and tree shaking everything you don't actually use away.
And it will also lead to the site not working out-of-the-box for privacy-conscious people like me who block third-party JS by default.