| Often overlooked things when discussing esbuild here: 1. It's not just a faster replacement for a single %tool_name% in your build chain: for the vast majority of cases, it's the whole "chain" in a single cli command if you're doing it right. That is, you don't just stick it inside, say, webpack as a faster replacement for babel (although you can). No, you look carefully through your webpack configs and its myriad of plugins, ask yourself whether you really need to inline css in jsx in png while simultaneously optimizing it for IE 4.0, realize you don't, through out the whole thing, and use esbuild instead. I have two 50K+ LOC projects using esbuild, and I would use it even if it was slower than webpack/babel/tsc simply not to worry about the build chain breaking due to an update to some obscure dependency or plugin. 2. It is fast because it's written from scratch to do a set of particular things and do it fast, not just because it's Go and parallelized. If you look at the commit log you will notice a lot of performance tweaks. If you look into the issues, you will find a lot of requests for additional features rejected, often due to possible negative performance impact. 3. The most impressive part about esbuild development is not just that it's one guy writing it: it is the level of support and documentation he manages to provide alongside. The release notes alone are a good course into nitty-gritty details of the web ecosystem: all the addressed edge cases are explained in detail. To top it all off--all opened issues, no matter how uninformed they seem, find a courteous response. |
It seems there’s a feature treadmill at work here where projects inexorably bloat as they get popular. But we tried “compose tools in the Unix way” with grunt too, and that led to spaghetti scripts, unique to each project, that were hard to reason about. I wonder if there is a middle way that can prevent the tool from giving in to the pressure to add features.