Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Webpack vs npm: What are the differences?
Webpack is a module bundler that transforms, bundles, and manages assets, while npm (Node Package Manager) is a package manager for JavaScript, facilitating the installation and management of project dependencies. Let's explore the key differences between them.
Bundling vs Package Management: The primary difference between Webpack and npm lies in their respective purposes. Webpack is a module bundler that takes multiple JavaScript files and their dependencies and bundles them into a single file. On the other hand, npm (Node Package Manager) is primarily used for installing, managing, and sharing reusable JavaScript packages.
Configuration: Webpack requires a specific configuration file (often referred to as webpack.config.js) to define how the bundling process should be executed. This configuration file specifies entry points, output paths, loaders, and other settings. In contrast, npm does not require a separate configuration file for its basic functionality. By utilizing the package.json file, developers can define scripts, dependencies, and other package-related details.
Module Resolution: Webpack follows a module resolution process that allows it to handle various module types, such as JavaScript, CSS, and images. This resolution process involves automatically resolving module imports, even for files with different extensions. On the other hand, npm does not directly handle module resolution but relies on the module resolution capabilities of a specific runtime environment (e.g., Node.js).
Tree Shaking: Webpack offers an optimization technique called "tree shaking," which eliminates unused code from the final bundled output. By analyzing the dependency graph, Webpack determines the code that is actually used and removes the rest. This helps in reducing bundle size and improving performance. On the contrary, npm does not inherently provide such optimization techniques.
Development vs Production Environments: Webpack handles the development and production environments differently. During development, it supports various tools like hot module replacement (HMR) and source maps, which aid in efficient development and debugging. In contrast, npm focuses more on managing dependencies and executing scripts, without specific optimizations for development or production environments.
In summary, Webpack streamlines the process of bundling and optimizing assets for web applications, enhancing performance and maintainability. npm, as a package manager, handles the installation, versioning, and sharing of JavaScript libraries and tools. While Webpack and npm often work together, they serve distinct roles in the JavaScript development ecosystem, with Webpack focusing on the build process and npm on package management.
From a StackShare Community member: “I’m a freelance web developer (I mostly use Node.js) and for future projects I’m debating between npm or Yarn as my default package manager. I’m a minimalist so I hate installing software if I don’t need to- in this case that would be Yarn. For those who made the switch from npm to Yarn, what benefits have you noticed? For those who stuck with npm, are you happy you with it?"
We use Yarn because it allows us to more simply manage our node_modules. It also simplifies commands and increases speed when installing modules. Our teams module download time was cut in half after switching from NPM to Yarn. We now require all employees to use Yarn (to prevent errors with package-lock.json and yarn.lock).
I use npm since new version is pretty fast as well (Yarn may be still faster a bit but the difference isn't huge). No need for other dependency and mainly Yarn sometimes do not work. Sometimes when I want to install project dependencies I got error using Yarn but with npm everything is installed correctly.
p.s.
I am not sure about the performance of the latest version of npm, whether it is different from my understanding of it below. Because I use npm very rarely when I had the following knowledge.
------⏬
I use Yarn because, first, yarn is the first tool to lock the version. Second, although npm also supports the lock version, when you use npm to lock the version, and then use package-lock.json on other systems, package-lock.json Will be modified. You understand what I mean, when you deploy projects based on Git...
I use npm because I also mainly use React and TypeScript. Since several typings (from DefinitelyTyped) depend on the React typings, Yarn tends to mess up which leads to duplicate libraries present (different versions of the same type definition), which hinders the Typescript compiler. Npm always resolves to a single version per transitive dependency. At least that's my experience with both.
As far as I know Yarn is a super module of NPM. But it still needs npm to run.
Yarn was developed by Facebook's guys to fix some npm issues and performance.
If you use the last version of npm most of this problem does not exist anymore.
You can choose the option which makes you more confortable. I like using yarn because I'm used to it.
In the end the packages will be the same. Just try both and choose the one you feel more confortable. :)
I am a minimalist too. I once had issues with installing Nuxt.js using NPM so I had to install Yarn but I also found that the Dev experience was much better
I use npm because its packaged with node installation and handles npm tokens in CI/CD tools for private packages/libraries.
I use npm because it has a lot of community support and the performance difference with alternative tool is not so significant for me.
Yarn made it painless for the team to sync on versions of packages that we use on the project <3
I use Yarn because it outputs nice progress messages with cute emoji and installs packages quickly if the package is cached. Also, Yarn creates yarn.lock file which makes the developer use the consistent environment.
You should use whichever had the best DX (developer experience) for your team. If you are doing a massive front-end project, consider yarn if not only because it makes it a snap to go from zero to ready. What some people say about npm being more stable or easier for smaller projects is highly true as well. (not to mention, you sometimes have to install yarn) But, note that official NodeJS Docker images ship with both npm and yarn. If you want to use yarn, put package-lock=false and optionally save-exact=true in your project's .npmrc file. Compare whether you prefer the ergonomics of yarn global add over npm install -g or see fewer meaningless warnings for the specific set of dependencies you leverage.
I use npm because its the official package manager for Node. It's reliability, security and speed has increased over time so the battle is over!
We tend to stick to npm, yarn is only a fancy alternative, not 10x better. Using a self -hosted private repository (via sinopia/npm-mirror) make package locking (mostly) pointless.
I use Yarn because it process my dependencies way faster, predictable deps resolution order, upgrade-interactive is very handy + some Yarn specific features (workspaces, Plug’n’Play alternative installation strategy) ...
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.
As we have to build the application for many different TV platforms we want to split the application logic from the device/platform specific code. Previously we had different repositories and it was very hard to keep the development process when changes were done in multiple repositories, as we had to synchronize code reviews as well as merging and then updating the dependencies of projects. This issues would be even more critical when building the project from scratch what we did at Joyn. Therefor to keep all code in one place, at the same time keeping in separated in different modules we decided to give a try to monorepo. First we tried out lerna which was fine at the beginning, but later along the way we had issues with adding new dependencies which came out of the blue and were not easy to fix. Next round of evolution was yarn workspaces, we are still using it and are pretty happy with dev experience it provides. And one more advantage we got when switched to yarn workspaces that we also switched from npm to yarn what improved the state of the lock file a lot, because with npm package-lock file was updated every time you run npm install, frequent updates of package-lock file were causing very often merge conflicts. So right now we not just having faster dependencies installation time but also no conflicts coming from lock file.
This was no real choice - we switched the moment Yarn was available, and never looked back. Yarn is the only reasonable frontend package manager that's actually being developed. They even aim to heal the node_modules madness with v2! Npm is just copying its ideas on top of introducing massive bugs with every change.
Pros of npm
- Best package management system for javascript647
- Open-source382
- Great community327
- More packages than rubygems, pypi, or packagist148
- Nice people matter112
- As fast as yarn but really free of facebook6
- Audit feature6
- Good following4
- Super fast1
- Stability1
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 npm
- Problems with lockfiles5
- Bad at package versioning and being deterministic5
- Node-gyp takes forever3
- Super slow1
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 npm?
What is Webpack?
Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions
What tools integrate with Webpack?
Sign up to get full access to all the tool integrationsMake informed product decisions
Blog Posts
+6
+31+46
+39
+43+42+27