For a more in-depth discussion of the differences between Lodash and Underscore, I recommend Ben McCormick's Underscore vs Lo-Dash[2].
And yes, you can pick and choose what modules you want. But you could do that with Mootools and it was released a decade ago. If you want a heavy framework with lots of modules, there are plenty to choose from.
Maybe if it offered a light version on the front page? The file linked from the front page is 372KB. By comparison, the file linked from Underscore's front page is 51KB.
- The actual difference (minified and gzipped) is 17.6 KB vs. 5.7KB.
- Lodash is written modularly so you can import only the methods you actually need.
- In order to "lose some weight" (as Jeremy Ashkenas called it), underscore dropped several methods that people really wanted (including other contributors).
- Also to cut down the size, several major pieces of functionality is not broken in older versions of IE
- Lodash provides a lot more functionality than underscore does, there's a lot of additional utilities including the ones that were dropped last minute by underscore.
There are a lot of other reasons to use lodash, but that was quickly becoming not a _couple_ of things.
Both of which are linked from the front page of their respective websites.
There used to be a compatibility build of lodash, but I think it might've been deprecated by now... In any case, migrating would be fairly straightforward I think.
[2] https://buzzdecafe.github.io/code/2014/05/16/introducing-ram...
Don't know how they compare though.
Good people of HN, this phrase deserves your upvotes.
