Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
RemoteJS vs Underscore: What are the differences?
Developers describe RemoteJS as "Connect to remote browser sessions and debug your JavaScript applications". It allows you to attach our debugging tools to a remote browser, without complex configuration or cables. Just run a bit of JavaScript, and get all the context and control you'll need to fix the most complex bugs. On the other hand, Underscore is detailed as "JavaScript's utility _ belt". A JavaScript library that provides a whole mess of useful functional programming helpers without extending any built-in objects.
RemoteJS and Underscore can be primarily classified as "Javascript Utilities & Libraries" tools.
Underscore is an open source tool with 24.7K GitHub stars and 5.41K GitHub forks. Here's a link to Underscore's open source repository on GitHub.
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 RemoteJS
Pros of Underscore
- Utility85
- Simple55
- Functional programming40
- Fast32
- Open source28
- Backbone20
- Javascript16
- Annotated source code8
- Library6