Alternatives to Webpacker logo

Alternatives to Webpacker

Parcel, Grunt, Bazel, rollup, and Brunch are the most popular alternatives and competitors to Webpacker.
124
48
+ 1
0

What is Webpacker and what are its top alternatives?

WebPack is a module bundler for JavaScript applications. It takes in resources like JavaScript, CSS, and images and generates a dependency graph to bundle them into one or more output files. This simplifies managing complex front-end projects and allows for easy deployment. However, WebPack can have a steep learning curve, especially for beginners, and may require additional configuration to work seamlessly with other tools and frameworks.

  1. Parcel: Parcel is a zero-configuration web application bundler. It supports various web technologies out of the box and offers fast performance. However, it may lack some advanced customization options compared to Webpacker.
  2. Rollup: Rollup is a module bundler specifically designed for JavaScript libraries. It focuses on tree-shaking to remove unused code, resulting in smaller bundle sizes. Rollup is known for its performance and simplicity, but it may require additional configuration for complex projects.
  3. Browserify: Browserify is a popular module bundler that brings Node.js-style require() statements to the browser. It simplifies managing dependencies and allows for a smoother development experience. However, Browserify may not offer as many advanced features as Webpacker.
  4. FuseBox: FuseBox is a blazing fast front-end development tool that offers efficient module bundling and code splitting. It aims to provide a developer-friendly experience with features like hot module reloading and speed optimizations. However, FuseBox may have a smaller community compared to Webpacker.
  5. Brunch: Brunch is a simple and fast build tool that focuses on developer productivity. It offers plug-and-play functionality with minimal configuration required. Brunch is known for its ease of use, but it may not have as many customization options as Webpacker.
  6. Snowpack: Snowpack is a lightning-fast frontend build tool that leverages esbuild for near-instant build times. It aims to streamline the development workflow by eliminating the need for bundling during development. Snowpack may offer improved performance compared to Webpacker but may not be suitable for all project types.
  7. Brunch: Brunch is a simple and fast build tool that focuses on developer productivity. It offers plug-and-play functionality with minimal configuration required. Brunch is known for its ease of use, but it may not have as many customization options as Webpacker.
  8. Parcel: Parcel is a zero-configuration web application bundler. It supports various web technologies out of the box and offers fast performance. However, it may lack some advanced customization options compared to Webpacker.
  9. Rollup: Rollup is a module bundler specifically designed for JavaScript libraries. It focuses on tree-shaking to remove unused code, resulting in smaller bundle sizes. Rollup is known for its performance and simplicity, but it may require additional configuration for complex projects.
  10. Browserify: Browserify is a popular module bundler that brings Node.js-style require() statements to the browser. It simplifies managing dependencies and allows for a smoother development experience. However, Browserify may not offer as many advanced features as Webpacker.

Top Alternatives to Webpacker

  • Parcel
    Parcel

    Parcel is a web application bundler, differentiated by its developer experience. It offers blazing fast performance utilizing multicore processing, and requires zero configuration. ...

  • Grunt
    Grunt

    The less work you have to do when performing repetitive tasks like minification, compilation, unit testing, linting, etc, the easier your job becomes. After you've configured it, a task runner can do most of that mundane work for you鈥攁nd your team鈥攚ith basically zero effort. ...

  • Bazel
    Bazel

    Bazel is a build tool that builds code quickly and reliably. It is used to build the majority of Google's software, and thus it has been designed to handle build problems present in Google's development environment. ...

  • rollup
    rollup

    It is a module bundler for JavaScript which compiles small pieces of code into something larger and more complex, such as a library or application. It uses the new standardized format for code modules included in the ES6 revision of JavaScript, instead of previous idiosyncratic solutions such as CommonJS and AMD. ...

  • Brunch
    Brunch

    Brunch is an assembler for HTML5 applications. It's agnostic to frameworks, libraries, programming, stylesheet & templating languages and backend technology. ...

  • Angular CLI
    Angular CLI

    A command-line interface tool that you use to initialize, develop, scaffold, and maintain Angular applications. You can use the tool directly in a command shell, or indirectly through an interactive UI such as Angular Console. ...

  • Browserify
    Browserify

    Browserify lets you require('modules') in the browser by bundling up all of your dependencies. ...

  • Webpack
    Webpack

    A bundler for javascript and friends. Packs many modules into a few bundled assets. Code Splitting allows to load parts for the application on demand. Through "loaders" modules can be CommonJs, AMD, ES6 modules, CSS, Images, JSON, Coffeescript, LESS, ... and your custom stuff. ...

Webpacker alternatives & related posts

Parcel logo

Parcel

796
250
18
馃摝馃殌 A fast, zero configuration web application bundler
796
250
+ 1
18
PROS OF PARCEL
  • 10
    Zero configuration
  • 8
    Built-in dev server with livereload
CONS OF PARCEL
  • 3
    Lack of documentation

related Parcel posts

Shared insights
on
WebpackWebpackParcelParcelgulpgulp

Hi, I am at a point when I discovered I need starter templates to kick off my web projects quickly and easily. I want to set-up my template code with the best or rather a packaging tool that is fast in compiling my Sass code and JS. Should I use gulp or Parcel or Webpack.

I need help please, A.S.A.P

See more
Gustavo Mu帽oz
Senior Software Engineer at JOOR | 4 upvotes 路 939.8K views
Shared insights
on
WebpackWebpackGruntGruntgulpgulpParcelParcel

Using Webpack is one of the best decision ever. I have used to Grunt and gulp previously, but the experience is not the same, and despite I know there are other bundlers like Parcel, Webpack gives me the perfect balance between automatization and configuration. The ecosystem of tools and loaders is amazing, and with WebPack #merge, you can modularize your build and define standard pieces to assemble different build configurations. I don't like processes where you cannot see their guts, and you have to trust in magic a little bit too much for my taste. But also I don't want to reinvent the wheel and lose too much time configuring my build processes. And of course, I love #WebPackDevServer and hot reloading.

See more
Grunt logo

Grunt

8.3K
5.5K
697
The JavaScript Task Runner
8.3K
5.5K
+ 1
697
PROS OF GRUNT
  • 288
    Configuration
  • 176
    Open source
  • 166
    Automation of minification and live reload
  • 60
    Great community
  • 7
    SASS compilation
CONS OF GRUNT
  • 1
    Poor mindshare/community support

related Grunt posts

Gustavo Mu帽oz
Senior Software Engineer at JOOR | 4 upvotes 路 939.8K views
Shared insights
on
WebpackWebpackGruntGruntgulpgulpParcelParcel

Using Webpack is one of the best decision ever. I have used to Grunt and gulp previously, but the experience is not the same, and despite I know there are other bundlers like Parcel, Webpack gives me the perfect balance between automatization and configuration. The ecosystem of tools and loaders is amazing, and with WebPack #merge, you can modularize your build and define standard pieces to assemble different build configurations. I don't like processes where you cannot see their guts, and you have to trust in magic a little bit too much for my taste. But also I don't want to reinvent the wheel and lose too much time configuring my build processes. And of course, I love #WebPackDevServer and hot reloading.

See more
Justin Dorfman
Open Source Program Manager at Reblaze | 4 upvotes 路 238.2K views

When my SSL cert MaxCDN was expiring on my personal site I decided it was a good time to revamp some things. Since GitHub Services is depreciated I can no longer have #CDN cache purges automated among other things. So I decided on the following: GitHub Pages, Netlify, Let's Encrypt and Jekyll. Staying the same was Bootstrap, jQuery, Grunt & #GoogleFonts.

What's awesome about GitHub Pages is that it has a #CDN (Fastly) built-in and anytime you push to master, it purges the cache instantaneously without you have to do anything special. Netlify is magic, I highly recommend it to anyone using #StaticSiteGenerators.

For the most part, everything went smoothly. The only things I had issues with were the following:

  • If you want to point www to GitHub Pages you need to rename the repo to www
  • If you edit something in the _config.yml you need to restart bundle exec jekyll s or changes won't show
  • I had to disable the Grunt htmlmin module. I replaced it with Jekyll layout that compresses HTML for #webperf

Last but certainly not least, I made a donation to Let's Encrypt. If you use their service consider doing it too: https://letsencrypt.org/donate/

See more
Bazel logo

Bazel

303
570
133
Build and test software of any size, quickly and reliably
303
570
+ 1
133
PROS OF BAZEL
  • 28
    Fast
  • 20
    Deterministic incremental builds
  • 17
    Correct
  • 16
    Multi-language
  • 14
    Enforces declared inputs/outputs
  • 10
    High-level build language
  • 9
    Scalable
  • 5
    Multi-platform support
  • 5
    Sandboxing
  • 4
    Dependency management
  • 2
    Windows Support
  • 2
    Flexible
  • 1
    Android Studio integration
CONS OF BAZEL
  • 3
    No Windows Support
  • 2
    Bad IntelliJ support
  • 1
    Poor windows support for some languages
  • 1
    Constant breaking changes
  • 1
    Learning Curve
  • 1
    Lack of Documentation

related Bazel posts

Joshua Dean K眉pper
CEO at Scrayos UG (haftungsbeschr盲nkt) | 2 upvotes 路 335.6K views

All Java-Projects are compiled using Apache Maven. We prefer it over Apache Ant and Gradle as it combines lightweightness with feature-richness and offers basically all we can imagine from a software project-management tool and more. We're open however to re-evaluate this decision in favor of Gradle or Bazel in the future if we feel like we're missing out on anything.

See more
rollup logo

rollup

1.8K
163
17
The next-generation JavaScript module bundler
1.8K
163
+ 1
17
PROS OF ROLLUP
  • 4
    Makes it easy to publish packages
  • 3
    Easier configuration
  • 2
    Better tree shaking
  • 2
    Provides smaller bundle size
  • 1
    Integrates seamlessly with SystemJS
  • 1
    Produces very clean code
  • 1
    Very reliable
  • 1
    Very robust Plugin-API (years old Plugins still work)
  • 1
    Very flexible
  • 1
    Was built with ESM-Modules in mind
CONS OF ROLLUP
  • 1
    No clear path for static assets
  • 1
    No Loader like Webpack (need to use sjs or ESM imports)
  • 1
    Almost everything needs to be a Plugin
  • 1
    Manual Chunking is a bit buggy

related rollup posts

Brunch logo

Brunch

105
127
40
Ultra-fast HTML5 build tool
105
127
+ 1
40
PROS OF BRUNCH
  • 13
    Easy and awesome
  • 9
    Ultra Fast
  • 9
    Light Configuration
  • 4
    Built-in dev server with live reload
  • 3
    Simple to use
  • 2
    Has many pre-configurable framework "skeletons"
CONS OF BRUNCH
    Be the first to leave a con

    related Brunch posts

    Angular CLI logo

    Angular CLI

    900
    740
    0
    A command line interface for Angular
    900
    740
    + 1
    0
    PROS OF ANGULAR CLI
      Be the first to leave a pro
      CONS OF ANGULAR CLI
        Be the first to leave a con

        related Angular CLI posts

        Vaibhav Taunk
        Team Lead at Technovert | 31 upvotes 路 4.2M views

        I am starting to become a full-stack developer, by choosing and learning .NET Core for API Development, Angular CLI / React for UI Development, MongoDB for database, as it a NoSQL DB and Flutter / React Native for Mobile App Development. Using Postman, Markdown and Visual Studio Code for development.

        See more

        Picked Angular 2 as framework since Angular CLI made it easy to get started on a self-contained frontend web project with TypeScript for easier development -- thanks to intellisense extensions for Visual Studio Code, hassle-free browser compatibility with the built-in Babel transpiler and packaging with the built-in Webpack configuration.

        See more
        Browserify logo

        Browserify

        1.8K
        414
        261
        Browser-side require() the node.js way
        1.8K
        414
        + 1
        261
        PROS OF BROWSERIFY
        • 75
          Node style browser code
        • 52
          Load modules installed by npm
        • 45
          Works great with gulp.js
        • 38
          NPM modules in the brower
        • 34
          Open source
        • 16
          Node streams
        • 1
          Easy setup
        CONS OF BROWSERIFY
          Be the first to leave a con

          related Browserify posts

          Yunus 脰ZCAN

          Appitr Run JavaScript ES6 with React Native in the browser built on Monaco Editor, Browserify Webpack Sequelize npm Node.js ExpressJS Babel Flow Type ESLint MobX GraphQL

          See more
          Webpack logo

          Webpack

          40.5K
          27.3K
          752
          A bundler for javascript and friends
          40.5K
          27.3K
          + 1
          752
          PROS OF WEBPACK
          • 309
            Most powerful bundler
          • 182
            Built-in dev server with livereload
          • 142
            Can handle all types of assets
          • 87
            Easy configuration
          • 22
            Laravel-mix
          • 4
            Overengineered, Underdeveloped
          • 2
            Makes it easy to bundle static assets
          • 2
            Webpack-Encore
          • 1
            Redundant
          • 1
            Better support in Browser Dev-Tools
          CONS OF WEBPACK
          • 15
            Hard to configure
          • 5
            No clear direction
          • 2
            Spaghetti-Code out of the box
          • 2
            SystemJS integration is quite lackluster
          • 2
            Loader architecture is quite a mess (unreliable/buggy)
          • 2
            Fire and Forget mentality of Core-Developers

          related Webpack posts

          Russel Werner
          Lead Engineer at StackShare | 32 upvotes 路 2.6M views

          StackShare Feed is built entirely with React, Glamorous, and Apollo. One of our objectives with the public launch of the Feed was to enable a Server-side rendered (SSR) experience for our organic search traffic. When you visit the StackShare Feed, and you aren't logged in, you are delivered the Trending feed experience. We use an in-house Node.js rendering microservice to generate this HTML. This microservice needs to run and serve requests independent of our Rails web app. Up until recently, we had a mono-repo with our Rails and React code living happily together and all served from the same web process. In order to deploy our SSR app into a Heroku environment, we needed to split out our front-end application into a separate repo in GitHub. The driving factor in this decision was mostly due to limitations imposed by Heroku specifically with how processes can't communicate with each other. A new SSR app was created in Heroku and linked directly to the frontend repo so it stays in-sync with changes.

          Related to this, we need a way to "deploy" our frontend changes to various server environments without building & releasing the entire Ruby application. We built a hybrid Amazon S3 Amazon CloudFront solution to host our Webpack bundles. A new CircleCI script builds the bundles and uploads them to S3. The final step in our rollout is to update some keys in Redis so our Rails app knows which bundles to serve. The result of these efforts were significant. Our frontend team now moves independently of our backend team, our build & release process takes only a few minutes, we are now using an edge CDN to serve JS assets, and we have pre-rendered React pages!

          #StackDecisionsLaunch #SSR #Microservices #FrontEndRepoSplit

          See more
          Jonathan Pugh
          Software Engineer / Project Manager / Technical Architect | 25 upvotes 路 3M views

          I needed to choose a full stack of tools for cross platform mobile application design & development. After much research and trying different tools, these are what I came up with that work for me today:

          For the client coding I chose Framework7 because of its performance, easy learning curve, and very well designed, beautiful UI widgets. I think it's perfect for solo development or small teams. I didn't like React Native. It felt heavy to me and rigid. Framework7 allows the use of #CSS3, which I think is the best technology to come out of the #WWW movement. No other tech has been able to allow designers and developers to develop such flexible, high performance, customisable user interface elements that are highly responsive and hardware accelerated before. Now #CSS3 includes variables and flexboxes it is truly a powerful language and there is no longer a need for preprocessors such as #SCSS / #Sass / #less. React Native contains a very limited interpretation of #CSS3 which I found very frustrating after using #CSS3 for some years already and knowing its powerful features. The other very nice feature of Framework7 is that you can even build for the browser if you want your app to be available for desktop web browsers. The latest release also includes the ability to build for #Electron so you can have MacOS, Windows and Linux desktop apps. This is not possible with React Native yet.

          Framework7 runs on top of Apache Cordova. Cordova and webviews have been slated as being slow in the past. Having a game developer background I found the tweeks to make it run as smooth as silk. One of those tweeks is to use WKWebView. Another important one was using srcset on images.

          I use #Template7 for the for the templating system which is a no-nonsense mobile-centric #HandleBars style extensible templating system. It's easy to write custom helpers for, is fast and has a small footprint. I'm not forced into a new paradigm or learning some new syntax. It operates with standard JavaScript, HTML5 and CSS 3. It's written by the developer of Framework7 and so dovetails with it as expected.

          I configured TypeScript to work with the latest version of Framework7. I consider TypeScript to be one of the best creations to come out of Microsoft in some time. They must have an amazing team working on it. It's very powerful and flexible. It helps you catch a lot of bugs and also provides code completion in supporting IDEs. So for my IDE I use Visual Studio Code which is a blazingly fast and silky smooth editor that integrates seamlessly with TypeScript for the ultimate type checking setup (both products are produced by Microsoft).

          I use Webpack and Babel to compile the JavaScript. TypeScript can compile to JavaScript directly but Babel offers a few more options and polyfills so you can use the latest (and even prerelease) JavaScript features today and compile to be backwards compatible with virtually any browser. My favorite recent addition is "optional chaining" which greatly simplifies and increases readability of a number of sections of my code dealing with getting and setting data in nested objects.

          I use some Ruby scripts to process images with ImageMagick and pngquant to optimise for size and even auto insert responsive image code into the HTML5. Ruby is the ultimate cross platform scripting language. Even as your scripts become large, Ruby allows you to refactor your code easily and make it Object Oriented if necessary. I find it the quickest and easiest way to maintain certain aspects of my build process.

          For the user interface design and prototyping I use Figma. Figma has an almost identical user interface to #Sketch but has the added advantage of being cross platform (MacOS and Windows). Its real-time collaboration features are outstanding and I use them a often as I work mostly on remote projects. Clients can collaborate in real-time and see changes I make as I make them. The clickable prototyping features in Figma are also very well designed and mean I can send clickable prototypes to clients to try user interface updates as they are made and get immediate feedback. I'm currently also evaluating the latest version of #AdobeXD as an alternative to Figma as it has the very cool auto-animate feature. It doesn't have real-time collaboration yet, but I heard it is proposed for 2019.

          For the UI icons I use Font Awesome Pro. They have the largest selection and best looking icons you can find on the internet with several variations in styles so you can find most of the icons you want for standard projects.

          For the backend I was using the #GraphCool Framework. As I later found out, #GraphQL still has some way to go in order to provide the full power of a mature graph query language so later in my project I ripped out #GraphCool and replaced it with CouchDB and Pouchdb. Primarily so I could provide good offline app support. CouchDB with Pouchdb is very flexible and efficient combination and overcomes some of the restrictions I found in #GraphQL and hence #GraphCool also. The most impressive and important feature of CouchDB is its replication. You can configure it in various ways for backups, fault tolerance, caching or conditional merging of databases. CouchDB and Pouchdb even supports storing, retrieving and serving binary or image data or other mime types. This removes a level of complexity usually present in database implementations where binary or image data is usually referenced through an #HTML5 link. With CouchDB and Pouchdb apps can operate offline and sync later, very efficiently, when the network connection is good.

          I use PhoneGap when testing the app. It auto-reloads your app when its code is changed and you can also install it on Android phones to preview your app instantly. iOS is a bit more tricky cause of Apple's policies so it's not available on the App Store, but you can build it and install it yourself to your device.

          So that's my latest mobile stack. What tools do you use? Have you tried these ones?

          See more