Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Underscore vs jQuery: What are the differences?
## Introduction
In web development, both Underscore and jQuery are popular JavaScript libraries that aid in simplifying and enhancing coding tasks. However, they have key differences that set them apart from each other.
1. **Syntax**: Underscore uses a functional programming syntax, making it more suitable for developers familiar with functional programming concepts. On the other hand, jQuery employs a more imperative approach, making it accessible to developers with varying programming backgrounds.
2. **File Size**: Underscore is smaller in size compared to jQuery, making it a more lightweight option for projects that require minimal library resources.
3. **API Design**: Underscore focuses on providing utility functions for common tasks like manipulating arrays, objects, and functions. In contrast, jQuery primarily concentrates on DOM manipulation and event handling, making it particularly useful for interactive web applications.
4. **Dependencies**: Underscore has no external dependencies, which means it can be easily integrated into projects without worrying about conflicting dependencies. In contrast, jQuery has a few dependencies, such as Sizzle for selector engine, which may require additional management.
5. **Community Support**: jQuery has a larger and more established community compared to Underscore. This means that there are more resources, plugins, and documentation available for developers using jQuery, making it easier to find solutions and assistance when needed.
6. **Browser Compatibility**: jQuery is well-known for its compatibility with older browsers, ensuring that web applications built with jQuery function correctly across a wide range of browsers. Underscore might not provide the same level of seamless compatibility with older browsers.
In Summary, Underscore and jQuery have distinct differences in terms of syntax, file size, API design, dependencies, community support, and browser compatibility, making them suitable for different types of web development projects.
The project is a web gadget previously made using vanilla script and JQuery, It is a part of the "Quicktext" platform and offers an in-app live & customizable messaging widget. We made that remake with React eco-system and Typescript and we're so far happy with results. We gained tons of TS features, React scaling & re-usabilities capabilities and much more!
What do you think?
I've an eCommerce platform building using Laravel, MySQL and jQuery. It's working good and if anyone become interested, I just deploy the entire source cod e in environment / Hosting. This is not a good model of course. Because everyone ask for small or large amount of change and I had to do this. Imagine when there will be 100 separate deploy and I had to manage 100 separate source. So How do I make my system architecture so that I'll have a core / base source code. To make any any change / update on specific deployment, it will be theme / plugin / extension based . Also if I introduce an API layer then I could handle the Web, Mobile App and POS as well ? Is the API should be part of source code or a individual single API and all the deployment will use that API ?
When I started TipMe, I thought about using React frontend. At the end, plain, simple jQuery won.
I had to build this iteration of the site fast and by using jQuery I could keep using Django as a full stack development tool. One important point is Django form (combined with Django Bootstrap3) means that I don't have to reinvent form rendering again, which will be the case with React.
Over time, more interactivity seeped into the site and React components start making its way into the codebase.
I now wish the site is built using React so that I could add more user friendly interfaces easier (no more fuddling with server states) but I would still say jQuery helped me get past those early days.
Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR) provides standard data objects in JSON format for the healthcare industry. Since JSON objects are hierarchical and tree-like, we had a need to defensively 'pluck' fields from our JSON objects and do lots of mapping. We tried jQuery and Underscore and a few other technologies like FHIRPath; but Lodash has been the most well supported, works in the most contexts, has the cleanest syntax, etc. We particularly like the ES6 version of Lodash, where we can import
the method names directly, without resorting to * or _ syntax. We got hooked on the 'get' function to defensively pluck fields from objects without crashing our user interface, and have found countless uses for the other lodash functions throughout our apps.
Lodash is great for developing and optimizing algorithms.
Pros of jQuery
- Cross-browser1.3K
- Dom manipulation957
- Power809
- Open source660
- Plugins610
- Easy459
- Popular395
- Feature-rich350
- Html5281
- Light weight227
- Simple93
- Great community84
- CSS3 Compliant79
- Mobile friendly69
- Fast67
- Intuitive43
- Swiss Army knife for webdev42
- Huge Community35
- Easy to learn11
- Clean code4
- Because of Ajax request :)3
- Powerful2
- Nice2
- Just awesome2
- Used everywhere2
- Improves productivity1
- Javascript1
- Easy Setup1
- Open Source, Simple, Easy Setup1
- It Just Works1
- Industry acceptance1
- Allows great manipulation of HTML and CSS1
- Widely Used1
- I love jQuery1
Pros of Underscore
- Utility85
- Simple55
- Functional programming40
- Fast32
- Open source28
- Backbone20
- Javascript16
- Annotated source code8
- Library6
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of jQuery
- Large size6
- Sometimes inconsistent API5
- Encourages DOM as primary data source5
- Live events is overly complex feature2