cash

Not every utility function is a one-liner. For example $.fn.one() or $.fn.on() with multiple events is easier to write with jQuery/Cash. Have a look under the hood: https://github.com/fabiospampinato/cash/blob/master/src/even...

Back in the days when trying to slim down JS I used https://github.com/filamentgroup/shoestring Main reason was because they had offered a custom build to only add what you really need. It looks like cash has that as well, just bit more hidden in the documentation https://github.com/fabiospampinato/cash/blob/master/docs/par... If I'd use it I'd give that a try. Somehow I still think going with what the browsers have to offer nowadays is a better option - actually it's really good and jQuery isn't really needed anymore. Especially when even the small jQuery alternative is still 6kB, while Preact, a react like lib, is only half the size.

From the migration guide I learned a few things that jQuery can do (and Cash can't) that I didn't know and I'll probably use some time: https://github.com/fabiospampinato/cash/blob/master/docs/mig...

If you are mainly using jquery for its DOM manipulation¹ rather than for browser compatibility² or things that didn't exist consistently in older browsers³ then there are much smaller libraries that do that job which may be worth looking into. https://github.com/fabiospampinato/cash or https://github.com/franciscop/umbrella to give a couple of examples. Some explicitly support IE11 so you are not dropping as much support for legacy browsers as you might otherwise. Though if jQuery works for you and isn't a performance issue, then by all means keep with it. It may not be ideal, but good enough and does the job. Let the naysayers spend their time debating whether you should or not, and just get on with making things! --- [1] selection engine, chained selections, chained modifications, … [2] not the issue it once was, if you can abandon IE a

I think it's a bit of both. jQuery served the purpose of making web development more sane back in the day by handling all browser quirks. Part of that was the nice syntax. I personally have tried to drop jQuery, but truthfully, its syntax is just much easier to use. Nowadays, I use Cash https://github.com/fabiospampinato/cash to give me the nice syntax without the bloat. It strikes the perfect balance for me.

Cash's maintainer here. I don't think this is true actually. Zepto supports some methods that Cash doesn't, but you probably shouldn't use them to begin with, like $.ajax, $.isArray, $.fn.animate etc. In 2022 either better built-in solutions exist or better specialized tiny libraries exist. Everything that is supported by both Zepto and Cash should either work identically or Cash's implementation should be closer to jQuery's. Just to mention one thing in this regard you can run jQuery's test suite with Cash, and Cash's test suite with jQuery, easily [0]. I've done so and looked at every single failed test manually a few times, I doubt nearly the same level of attention went into Zepto. Just to mention one difference: Cash supports jQuery-style event namespacing, Zepto just doesn't support this, it is implementing something that looks simi

Cash is also a great jQuery replacement. It's slightly larger than Umbrella, but does more. It also supports partial builds to shrink it down further. https://github.com/fabiospampinato/cash

An old classic worth referencing if you're wondering whether you need jQuery (or any alternatives like UmbrellaJS[0] or Cash[0]): http://youmightnotneedjquery.com/ [0]: https://umbrellajs.com/ [1]: https://github.com/fabiospampinato/cash

I'm not sure I buy this argument, one can't just say that ~30kb isn't a lot because 30 is a number perceived as low, would 30kb be justified for a library that allows you to toggle a class on a node? Of course it wouldn't, you need to measure what you are getting for 30kb. I don't buy the second part of the argument either, you can load a 1000kb image on a blog post and that won't have nearly the same effect as loading 1000kb of JS. The JS needs to be parsed and executed and maybe the site doesn't even work without it, the image can probably be rendered progressively, can be decoded in another thread, nothing is really waiting on it to load, and if it doesn't load at all it's not the end of the world anyway. With ~4kb you can have Preact, is jQuery Slim (~26kb) giving you ~6.5x times as much value as Preact really? Maybe it is, probably n

jQuery is not tree-shakeable because it uses a chainable API. Like you don't import `toggleClass`, you access the `toggleClass` property of a jQuery instance, so it can't be tree-shaken off automatically. Even if somebody made a bundler plugin for doing the heavy work jQuery can only be partially compiled with whole modules excluded, you can't exclude individual methods (e.g. you can't just remove `toggleClass`, you have to remove also `addClass`, `removeClass` etc.). FYI I maintain a jQuery alternative that supports being partially compiled with individual modules turned off, but it requires manually listing them: https://github.com/fabiospampinato/cash

Vanilla JS refers to Javascript that uses native browser methods instead of relying on a library. This is just replacing jQuery with another library constructed on the fly, but there are already minimal and modern alternatives with the jQuery API like zepto and cash. 1) https://github.com/fabiospampinato/cash 2) https://github.com/madrobby/zepto

I maintain an alternative to jQuery called Cash [0], this looks cool! If you are interested in joining forces OP it'd be cool to have this capability in Cash itself. IMO that'd be the best of both world because this feature is cool and useful, and Cash's methods are most probably closer to jQuery's, better tested and there are more of them available (76 vs 44). For example, your `on` method [1]: - Doesn't support event delegation. - Doesn't support event namespaces. - Doesn't support receiving an argument mapping events to callbacks like jQuery also can. - It seems to have subtle bugs, like the way the events string is split makes so that double consecutive spaces in it (which can happen as a result of a typo) will result in listening to the empty string event. Basically: 'foo bar'.split ( ' ' ) => ['foo', '', 'bar'] (there are two space

Cash supports partial builds: https://github.com/fabiospampinato/cash/blob/master/docs/par...

I'd suggest to anybody wanting a thin wrapper over the DOM to just go with Cash [1] instead, which I maintain. Cash is largely a drop-in replacement for jQuery Slim at a significantly smaller size (~6kb vs ~24kb min+gzip). The methods listed in youmightnotneedjquery.com are a little simplistic/buggy at times and not tested, if you just need a single method from jQuery it would probably be a better idea to simply copy/paste it from Cash. [1]: https://github.com/fabiospampinato/cash