Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
three.js vs Underscore: What are the differences?
Developers describe three.js as "A JavaScript 3D library". It is a cross-browser JavaScript library and Application Programming Interface used to create and display animated 3D computer graphics in a web browser. 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.
three.js and Underscore belong to "Javascript Utilities & Libraries" category of the tech stack.
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.
According to the StackShare community, Underscore has a broader approval, being mentioned in 1173 company stacks & 457 developers stacks; compared to three.js, which is listed in 10 company stacks and 20 developer stacks.
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 three.js
Pros of Underscore
- Utility85
- Simple55
- Functional programming40
- Fast32
- Open source28
- Backbone20
- Javascript16
- Annotated source code8
- Library6