Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Brunch vs Webpack: What are the differences?
Introduction: Brunch and Webpack are both popular module bundlers for JavaScript applications. However, they have key differences that set them apart.
Configuration: Brunch focuses on convention over configuration, aiming to reduce the need for extensive setup. In contrast, Webpack offers more flexibility with a highly configurable approach, allowing developers to have fine-grained control over the build process.
Plugin Ecosystem: Webpack has a vast plugin ecosystem that allows developers to extend its functionality with ease. Brunch, on the other hand, has a more limited set of plugins available, which may restrict customization options for developers.
Hot Module Replacement (HMR): Webpack comes with built-in support for Hot Module Replacement, which enables developers to see changes in real-time without refreshing the page. Brunch, on the other hand, lacks native HMR support and requires additional setup to achieve the same functionality.
Code Splitting: Webpack offers advanced code splitting capabilities out of the box, allowing developers to split code into smaller chunks for better performance optimization. Brunch, on the other hand, does not provide the same level of built-in support for code splitting, requiring developers to use workarounds or additional plugins.
Performance: Webpack is known for its powerful tree-shaking and module bundling capabilities, making it a preferred choice for complex and large-scale projects where performance optimization is crucial. Brunch, while efficient for smaller projects, may not perform as well in scenarios that demand high-performance optimization.
Community and Support: Webpack has a larger and more active community, with frequent updates and extensive documentation available. Brunch, while still actively maintained, may have fewer resources and community support compared to Webpack.
In Summary, Brunch and Webpack differ in terms of configuration ease, plugin ecosystem, HMR support, code splitting capabilities, performance optimization, and community support.
The developer experience Webpack gave us was not delighting anyone. It works and is stable and consistent. It is also slow and frustrating. We decided to check out Vite as an alternative when moving to Vue 3 and have been amazed. It is very early in development and there are plenty of rough edges, but it has been a breath of fresh air not waiting for anything to update. It is so fast we have found ourselves using devtools in browser less because changing styles is just as fast in code. We felt confident using the tool because although it is early in its development, the production build is still provided by Rollup which is a mature tool. We also felt optimistic that as good as it is right now, it will only continue to get better, as it is being worked on very actively. So far we are really happy with the choice.
I could define the next points why we have to migrate:
- Decrease build time of our application. (It was the main cause).
- Also
jspm installtakes much more time thannpm install. - Many config files for SystemJS and JSPM. For Webpack you can use just one main config file, and you can use some separate config files for specific builds using inheritance and merge them.
We mostly use rollup to publish package onto NPM. For most all other use cases, we use the Meteor build tool (probably 99% of the time) for publishing packages. If you're using Node on FHIR you probably won't need to know rollup, unless you are somehow working on helping us publish front end user interface components using FHIR. That being said, we have been migrating away from Atmosphere package manager towards NPM. As we continue to migrate away, we may publish other NPM packages using rollup.
Pros of Brunch
- Easy and awesome13
- Ultra Fast9
- Light Configuration9
- Built-in dev server with live reload4
- Simple to use3
- Has many pre-configurable framework "skeletons"2
Pros of Webpack
- Most powerful bundler309
- Built-in dev server with livereload182
- Can handle all types of assets142
- Easy configuration87
- Laravel-mix22
- Overengineered, Underdeveloped4
- Makes it easy to bundle static assets2
- Webpack-Encore2
- Redundant1
- Better support in Browser Dev-Tools1
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of Brunch
Cons of Webpack
- Hard to configure15
- No clear direction5
- Spaghetti-Code out of the box2
- SystemJS integration is quite lackluster2
- Loader architecture is quite a mess (unreliable/buggy)2
- Fire and Forget mentality of Core-Developers2
Sign up to add or upvote consMake informed product decisions
What is Brunch?
What is Webpack?
Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
What companies use Brunch?
Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions
What tools integrate with Brunch?
What tools integrate with Webpack?
Sign up to get full access to all the tool integrationsMake informed product decisions
Blog Posts
+31
+46
+39
+43+42+27