[aaaaaaabbbbbb]

I have recently written a broader exposition on frontend build tooling, perhaps it will be useful: https://sunsetglow.net/posts/frontend-build-systems.html.

The performance gains in the recent past have mostly been due to moving away from single-threaded JavaScript to multi-threaded compiled languages. This requires a complete rewrite, so existing tools rarely take this step. We see this optimization in Farm alongside "partial bundling," which strikes a performance-optimal balance between full bundling (Webpack) and no bundling (Vite) in development.

Vite abstracts over a preconfigured set of "lower-level" frontend build tools consisting of a mixture of older single-threaded JavaScript tools and newer multi-threaded compiled language tools. Vite can adopt the partial bundling of Farm, but dispensing with its remaining JavaScript tools is a major breaking update.

[genuine_smiles]

> The performance gains in the recent past have mostly been due to moving away from single-threaded JavaScript to multi-threaded compiled languages.

This is overly simplistic. Parcel had far better performance than Webpack before they added native code or threading.

Webpack remained slow because it didn’t have a good public/private interface for its plugins, so the changes that could be made were limited.

> Vite can adopt the partial bundling of Farm, but dispensing with its remaining JavaScript tools is a major breaking update.

Turbopack and Parcel both have excellent performance without any compromises to their bundling strategy. Vite skipping this likely just simplifies it’s architecture. Bundling creates an opportunity to be slow, but it doesn’t necessitate it.

[todotask]

Rolldown (Rollup compatible) for Vite which is written in Rust and still in active development.

[snthpy]

Busy reading this and it's great so far. One comment, you've referenced "tree shaking" a few times without explaining what it is. I think I know but it might help others to explain that before your reference it.

[IshKebab]

I would just use "dead code elimination" instead. They're the same but that actually tells you what it is.

[aaaaaaabbbbbb]

Thanks for the feedback!

I struggled with the ordering since each section is somewhat mutually dependent; this is arranged more like a thematic history than a chronological one.

Tree-shaking naturally fits under bundling, and I'm afraid that explaining it earlier will make tree-shaking's explanation itself contextless since without bundling there is nothing to tree shake.

I can hyperlink those references to the tree-shaking section tomorrow so that there is an action for the confused.

[snthpy]

Thank you for this. This looks like just what I was looking for!