Replace underscore with lodash

[StephanHoyer]

I used current version of lodash (2.4). For frontend i used the strict mode compliant version of lodash. It is also possible to use different versions of lodash for legacy and modern browsers. It is even possible to only use parts of lodash. This can possibly slim down you footprint, since you only use parts of underscore. therefor you must require only the function you want to use and not the whole library. This may be a little more work to do, because you have to review every require.

[StephanHoyer]

I think it would be nice to integrate a performance test suite to see, if changes like this improve performance.

[it-ony]

For the nodejs environment, we can use the npm dependency lodash as replacement. For the client side replacement, I only see an advantage, if we use a custom build with only the necessary parts.

We should generate our custom lodash library with https://github.com/lodash/grunt-lodash and place it under js/lib/lodash.js

[StephanHoyer]

yes, that's the way to go.

Lodash installs a binary, which can build custom version from the command line. But since your already using grunt, it's probably better to use it for the lodash build.

I don't really know, which parts of underscore/lodash your using, so I think I can't assist here.

[it-ony]

@krebbl and me also need to dig into, which functions we use. Maybe we just search for _.\w+\b :)

[StephanHoyer]

seems legit, but i think you sometimes use 'underscore', but that's solvable :D

[it-ony]

'underscore', should only be the import name of the dependency. But, we'll find it.

[StephanHoyer]

first match :)
https://github.com/rappid/rAppid.js/blob/master/js/lib/rAppid.js#L317

[tomByrer]

There is an 100% Underscore compatible build.
Also, Lo-Dash is much more actively maintained, better docs (IMHO), better browser compatibility, etc.
If you want to see some micro-benchmarks: https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&as_q=lodash+underscore