Webpacker vs rollup

Overview

rollup

Stacks2.4K

Followers164

Votes17

Webpacker

Stacks204

Followers48

Votes0

GitHub Stars5.3K

Forks1.5K

Webpacker vs rollup: What are the differences?

Introduction

Webpacker and Rollup are both popular module bundlers commonly used in web development projects. While they serve a similar purpose of bundling JavaScript modules, there are key differences between the two tools that developers should consider.

Configuration Complexity: Webpacker typically requires more configuration and setup compared to Rollup. Webpacker's configuration can be complex and intimidating for beginners, whereas Rollup offers a simpler and more straightforward configuration process, making it easier to get started with.
Tree Shaking: Rollup is known for its superior tree shaking capabilities compared to Webpacker. Tree shaking is a process of eliminating dead code from your bundle, resulting in smaller file sizes and improved performance. Rollup's tree shaking algorithm is more effective in removing unused code, leading to more efficient bundles.
Bundle Size Optimization: Rollup excels in producing smaller bundle sizes compared to Webpacker. Rollup's tree shaking feature, along with its efficient code-splitting mechanism, helps in generating minimal and optimized bundles. This can be beneficial for websites seeking faster loading times and improved user experience.
Usage in Library Development: Rollup is often preferred for library developers due to its ability to create smaller and more concise bundles. Libraries leveraging Rollup can offer better performance and compatibility with different environments. On the other hand, Webpacker is more suitable for complex web applications with various dependencies and configurations.
Community and Ecosystem: Webpacker has a larger and more established community compared to Rollup. This results in a wider range of plugins, loaders, and community support available for Webpacker users. Rollup, while growing in popularity, may have a smaller ecosystem with limited resources and support options.
Development Speed and Build Time: Rollup is known for its faster build times compared to Webpacker. The simplicity of Rollup's bundling process, along with its efficient module resolution algorithm, can significantly reduce the build time of projects. This can be advantageous for developers seeking quicker feedback loops during development.

In Summary, when choosing between Webpacker and Rollup, developers should consider factors such as configuration complexity, tree shaking capabilities, bundle size optimization, suitability for library development, community support, and build time efficiency.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs

CLI (Node.js)

Manual

Advice on rollup, Webpacker

Abigail

Dec 10, 2019

Decided

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.

224k views224k

Comments

Detailed Comparison

rollup	Webpacker
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.	Webpacker makes it easy to use the JavaScript preprocessor and bundler Webpack to manage application-like JavaScript in Rails. It coexists with the asset pipeline, as the purpose is only to use Webpack for app-like JavaScript, not images, css, or even JavaScript Sprinkles (that all continues to live in app/assets).
Statistics
GitHub Stars -	GitHub Stars 5.3K
GitHub Forks -	GitHub Forks 1.5K
Stacks 2.4K	Stacks 204
Followers 164	Followers 48
Votes 17	Votes 0
Pros & Cons
Pros 4 Makes it easy to publish packages 3 Easier configuration 2 Provides smaller bundle size 2 Better tree shaking 1 Integrates seamlessly with SystemJS Cons 1 Manual Chunking is a bit buggy 1 Almost everything needs to be a Plugin 1 No Loader like Webpack (need to use sjs or ESM imports) 1 No clear path for static assets	No community feedback yet
Integrations
No integrations available	Rails Webpack

What are some alternatives to rollup, Webpacker?

gulp

Build system automating tasks: minification and copying of all JavaScript files, static images. More capable of watching files to automatically rerun the task when a file changes.

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.

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—and your team—with basically zero effort.

Brunch

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

Parcel

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

Backpack

Backpack is minimalistic build system for Node.js. Inspired by Facebook's create-react-app, Zeit's Next.js, and Remy's Nodemon, Backpack lets you create modern Node.js apps and services with zero configuration. Backpack handles all the file-watching, live-reloading, transpiling, and bundling, so you don't have to.

Vite

It is an opinionated web dev build tool that serves your code via native ES Module imports during dev and bundles it with Rollup for production.

Pingy CLI

Gulp and Grunt and other heavyweight build tools are great for complicated build workflows. Sometimes you want something simpler that doesn't take lots of configuration to get up and running. That's Pingy CLI.

Microbundle

Zero-configuration bundler for tiny modules, powered by Rollup.

System.js

It is a Universal Module Loader for JavaScript. If you've used RequireJs or a CommonJs bundler in the past, you have probably created modules.Configurable module loader enabling dynamic ES module workflows in browsers and NodeJS.

Related Comparisons

Webpacker vs rollup: What are the differences?

Introduction

Configuration Complexity: Webpacker typically requires more configuration and setup compared to Rollup. Webpacker's configuration can be complex and intimidating for beginners, whereas Rollup offers a simpler and more straightforward configuration process, making it easier to get started with.
Tree Shaking: Rollup is known for its superior tree shaking capabilities compared to Webpacker. Tree shaking is a process of eliminating dead code from your bundle, resulting in smaller file sizes and improved performance. Rollup's tree shaking algorithm is more effective in removing unused code, leading to more efficient bundles.
Bundle Size Optimization: Rollup excels in producing smaller bundle sizes compared to Webpacker. Rollup's tree shaking feature, along with its efficient code-splitting mechanism, helps in generating minimal and optimized bundles. This can be beneficial for websites seeking faster loading times and improved user experience.
Usage in Library Development: Rollup is often preferred for library developers due to its ability to create smaller and more concise bundles. Libraries leveraging Rollup can offer better performance and compatibility with different environments. On the other hand, Webpacker is more suitable for complex web applications with various dependencies and configurations.
Community and Ecosystem: Webpacker has a larger and more established community compared to Rollup. This results in a wider range of plugins, loaders, and community support available for Webpacker users. Rollup, while growing in popularity, may have a smaller ecosystem with limited resources and support options.
Development Speed and Build Time: Rollup is known for its faster build times compared to Webpacker. The simplicity of Rollup's bundling process, along with its efficient module resolution algorithm, can significantly reduce the build time of projects. This can be advantageous for developers seeking quicker feedback loops during development.

Webpacker vs rollup

Overview