Alpine wouldn't be an equivalent comparison. The template in the HTML would require a different way of measuring size.
I did implement Alpine in the JS Frameworks Benchmark and one thing I noticed was the base framework size was about 16kb. It isn't really built for treeshaking (github.com/alpinejs/alpine/discuss...).
I think for Alpine the approach of HTML template is going to limit you to smaller applications any way (intentionally), so assuming the best case I'd picture it similar to Vue except you probably wouldn't go past 40kb.
I appreciate the well written comment.
I have seen "large" projects where the largeness was take up by php and used minimal to none javascript on top of using an overkill framework.
I should have clarified. I meant large JavaScript rendered projects, since that is what we are measuring here.
Are you sure you want to hide this comment? It will become hidden in your post, but will still be visible via the comment's permalink.
Hide child comments as well
Confirm
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
Alpine wouldn't be an equivalent comparison. The template in the HTML would require a different way of measuring size.
I did implement Alpine in the JS Frameworks Benchmark and one thing I noticed was the base framework size was about 16kb. It isn't really built for treeshaking (github.com/alpinejs/alpine/discuss...).
I think for Alpine the approach of HTML template is going to limit you to smaller applications any way (intentionally), so assuming the best case I'd picture it similar to Vue except you probably wouldn't go past 40kb.
I appreciate the well written comment.
I have seen "large" projects where the largeness was take up by php and used minimal to none javascript on top of using an overkill framework.
I should have clarified. I meant large JavaScript rendered projects, since that is what we are measuring here.