Related: This is a nice write-up of how to write reactive jQuery. It's presented as an alternative to jQuery spaghetti code, in the context of being in a legacy codebase where you might not have access to newer frameworks.
This brought me flashbacks of jQuery spaghetti monsters from years ago, some were Backbone related. In retrospect, over-engineered React code can be worse than decently organized jQuery code, but some jQuery mess was worse than any React code. So I guess I'm saying, React did raise the bar and standard of quality - but it can get to be too much, sometimes a judicious use of old familiar tool gets the job done.
I used this approach before and it indeed works better than the 2010-style jQuery mess. A good fit for userscripts too, where the problem you attempt to solve is fairly limited and having dependencies, especially with a build steps, is a pain. Note that you don't need jQuery for this at all, unless you are somehow stuck with ancient browser support as a requirement - querySelector, addEventListener, innerHtml - the basic building blocks of the approach - have been available and stable for a long time.
Unfortunately, nowadays writing userscripts is much harder than it used to be. Most websites are using some sort of reactive FE framework so you need to make extensive use of mutationObservers (or whatever the equivalent is in jQuery I guess).
Very true. I guess that depends on what websites you find issues with? I just checked mine and all of those are quality of life improvements for fully server rendered sites like HN or phpBB forums.
Yeah, I mostly use it for QoL improvements but for work related things. So Jira, Bitbucket, GitHub, Linear etc. basically whatever my employer uses. Back in the early 2010s most of that software was fully server rendered. Nowadays it's pretty rare for that to be the case.
I just try and get LLMs to do it for me because I'm lazy, and they like to use setInterval instead of mutationObservers and if it works, I just live with the inefficiency.
The Atlassian stack is particularly bad to extend IMHO given that there are sooooo many API endpoints that their UI calls and most of them are dog slow.
That's a very nice pattern indeed. If you add signals, the update function even gets called automatically. That's basically what we do in [Reactive Mastro](https://mastrojs.github.io/reactive/) ;-)
The problem with jQuery is that, being imperative, it quickly becomes complex when you need to handle more than one thing because you need to cover imperatively all cases.
Yeah, that's the other HN koan about "You probably don't need React if..." But if you are using jquery/vanilla to shove state into your HTML, you probably actually do need something like react.
Part of me feels the same way, and ~2015 me was full on SPA believer, but nowadays I sigh a little sigh of relief when I land on a site with the aesthetic markers of PHP and jQuery and not whatever Facebook Marketplace is made out of. Not saying I’d personally want to code in either of them, but I appreciate that they work (or fail) predictably, and usually don’t grind my browser tab to a halt. Maybe it’s because sites that used jQuery and survived, survived because they didn’t exceed a very low threshold of complexity.
In case you missed them: check out querySelector and querySelectorAll. They are closer to what the jQuery selector system does, and I think they were inspired by it.
If the verbosity bothers you, you can always define an utility function with a short name (although I'm not personally a fan of this kind of things).
body.qsa('.class').forEach(e=>):
Yes, add qs() and Array.from(qsa()) aliases to the Node prototype, and .body to the window, and you’ve saved yourself thousands of keystrokes. Then you can get creative with Proxy if you want to, but I never saw the need.
Agree if you've a library developer. If you're an app or website developer then it's your project. Everyone else should steer clear of adding to native prototypes, just so they are clean for the end user.
If you are an app or website developer, at least you won't break other's systems.
But you might still break stuff in your own projects. Imagine you extend a native prototype with a method, and later the native prototype starts having a method with the same name.
Newer libraries start using that new standard method.
You upgrade the libraries your website depends on, or add a dependency, and this new code happens to depend on that native prototype. Only you replaced it with your custom method, and that method likely doesn't have the exact same behavior. You broke that new code and fixing this might not be trivial because uses of your custom method are sprinkled everywhere in your code.
It only works if you ever works on projects that have zero dependencies, or dependencies you never update.
Or you could spare yourself the troubles and define a method that takes the node in parameter.
It's also a question of forming good habits: you could be working on your projects now, forming a habit of extending prototypes, but will you remember not to do this the day you write a library?
By the way, how can you be sure you won't move some of your app code to a library because you like your utility functions and would like to reuse them in another project of yours? And why not open source that shared code, so you can just install it with NPM? Bam, that stuff is a library now.
I hate to sound like a webdev stereotype but surely the parsing step of querySelector, which is cached, is not slow enough to warrant maintaining such a build step.
That changelog is wild; it closes out dozens of issues that have been open on Github for 5+ years. I assume that's related to this being the first new major version in years.
Has anyone done any benchmarks yet to see how jQuery 4 compares to jQuery 3.7?
When they started adding new hooks just to work around their own broken component/rendering lifecycle, I knew React was doomed to become a bloated mess.
Nobody in their right mind is remembering to use `useDeferredValue` or `useEffectEvent` for their very niche uses.
These are a direct result of React's poor component lifecycle design. Compare to Vue's granular lifecycle hooks which give you all the control you need without workarounds, and they're named in a way that make sense. [1]
And don't get me started on React's sad excuse for global state management with Contexts. A performance nightmare full of entire tree rerenders on every state change, even if components aren't subscribing to that state. Want subscriptions? Gotta hand-roll everything or use a 3rd party state library which don't support initialization before your components render if your global state depends on other state/data in React-land.
It's overly verbose, unintuitive and in 2025, having a virtual dom is no longer compulsory to write interactive web apps. If you want to write modern web apps, you can use Svelte. If you want to write web apps truly functionally, you can use Elm. React is the jQuery of our times. It was really helpful in the Angular era but we are living at the dawn of a new era now.
jQuery was very useful when many features were missing or not consistent/standardized between browsers. Nowadays, JS / DOM API is very rich, mature and standardized. So, jQuery is not as necessary as it was before.
Yes, sometimes the vanilla JS analogs are not the most elegant, but the vast majority are not terribly complicated either.
IMHO, another advantage of vanilla JS (aside from saving ~30KB) is potentially easier debugging. For example, I could find / debug the event listeners using the dev tools more easily when they were implemented via vanilla JS, since for complicated event listeners I had to step through a lot of jQuery code.
It's amazing how much jQuery is still used today. Even on modern websites you can often find it included (browser devtools -> jQuery in the console, and see). And not just on hobbyist sites, but on serious company websites and their web tools as well.
It looks like it was done to not delay the 4.0 release. Since they follow semvar, that means it won't get the axe until 5.0 [1]. Pretty wild considering that 3.0 was released 10 years ago.
But maybe they will scope this one better: they were talking about getting 4.0 released in 2020 back in 2019!
Backwards compatibility. Apparently there are still some people stuck on IE11. It's nice that jQuery still supports those users and the products that they are still running.
> We also dropped support for other very old browsers, including Edge Legacy, iOS versions earlier than the last 3, Firefox versions earlier than the last 2 (aside from Firefox ESR), and Android Browser.
Safari from iOS 16, released in 2022, is more modern in every conceivable way than MSIE 11. I'd also bet there are more people stuck with iOS 16- than those who can only use IE 11, except maybe at companies with horrid IT departments, in which case I kind of see this as enabling them to continue to suck.
I'd vote to rip the bandaid off. MSIE is dead tech, deader than some of the other browsers they're deprecating. Let it fade into ignomony as soon as possible.
There are a lot of intranet web applications that require IE, and IE is still in support by Microsoft. Even on Windows 11 Edge still has IE Mode for that reason. IPhones stuck on older iOS version by definition aren’t supported by Apple anymore.
“Support” here probably means “we’re testing jQuery for compatibility on those web browsers” - likely Safari from iOS 16 still runs this version of jQuery just fine. However, running automated test suites or support bugfixing for those clients is a lot harder than spinning up some Microsoft-provided VM with IE11 on it.
> There are likely to be no devices running iOS 16
My iPhone X is stuck on iOS 16 with no way to upgrade.
However, the phone is still working well. Despite being in daily use for 8 years it still has 81% battery capacity, has never been dropped, has a great OLED screen, can record 4K@60 video. It is far more responsive than a brand new 2025 $200 Android phone from e.g. Xiaomi. It still gets security patches from Apple. The only real shortcoming compared to a modern iPhone is the low light camera performance. That and some app developers don't support iOS 16 anymore, so e.g. I can't use the ChatGPT app and have to use it via the browser, but the Gemini app works fine.
I visited a distillery in 2020. Their machines were managed by HP laptops running Windows XP. Those machines and those laptops and that Windows XP are probably still there with their old IE browser.
There are some really retrograde government and bigcorps, running ten year old infrastructure. And if that is your customer-base? You do it. Plus I worked on a consumer launch site for something you might remember, and we got the late requirement for IE7 support, because that's what the executives in Japan had. No customers cared, but yeah it worked in IE7.
Oh, certainly, corporations run ten-year-old software. But for the record, IE 11 turns 13 this year [1]. Which makes it somewhat more surprising to me.
I think anything still using ActiveX like stuff or "native" things. Sure, it should all be dead and gone, but some might not be and there is no path forward with any of that AFAIK.
Surely by this point someone has written a 0-day for MSIE 11 which gets root and silently installs an Internet Explorer skinned Chromium. If not, someone should get onto that. —Signed, everyone
Most of the changes are completely reasonable - a lot are internal cleanup that would require no code changes on the user side, dropping older browsers, etc.
But the fact that there are breaking API changes is the most surprising thing to me. Projects that still use jQuery are going to be mostly legacy projects (I myself have several lying around). Breaking changes means more of an upgrade hassle on something that's already not worth much of an upgrade hassle to begin with. Removing things like `jQuery.isArray` serve only to make the upgrade path harder - the internal jQuery function code could literally just be `Array.isArray`, but at least then you wouldn't be breaking jQuery users' existing code.
At some point in the life of projects like these, I feel like they should accept their place in history and stop themselves breaking compatibility with any of the countless thousands (millions!) of their users' projects. Just be a good clean library that one can keep using without having to think about it forever and ever.
I don’t understand your use case. If you’ve got legacy projects that you don’t want to touch, why upgrade a dependency to a new major version?
You can keep using jquery without having to think about it. Just keep using version 3.7 and don’t even think about version 4.
jQuery made a messy ecosystem slightly less fragmented. Combined with CKEditor it effectively tamed a lot of web-developer chaos until nodejs dropped. =3
Everything I ever used jquery for 15 years ago, I found myself able to do with the CSS and the JS standard library maybe 10 years ago. I honestly am confused when I see jquery used today for anything.
Is there still anything jquery does you cannot easily do with a couple lines of stdlib?
The terse and chainable jQuery syntax is more readable, easier to remember, and thus more pleasant to maintain. Rewriting for stdlib is easy, but bloats out the code by forcing you to pepper in redundant boilerplate on nearly every line.
jQuery's big point was to give a consistent API over inconsistent browser implementations, so it typically saves you from bites more often than it bites you.
What is the usecase for this in the age of React, NextJS? And for static sites we have Astro etc.
And even if you need something simple why use jQuery? Vanila JS has better API now. Am I missing anything?
I do a lot of custom JS widget development, games, and utilities that are outside the context of a gigantic framework like React. Not everything is a a full-page SPA. Vanilla JS is indeed better than it was, but I found myself writing small JQ-like libraries and utilities to do tedious or even basic DOM manipulation, so I switched back to JQ and saved myself a lot of time and headaches. Compressed, minified JQ is also pretty small and is negligible in space consumption.
JQ is also used in frameworks like Bootstrap (although I think they’re trying to drop third-party dependencies like this since they tend to cause conflicts).
I have also used JQ in an Angular app where complex on-the-fly DOM manipulation just isn’t practical with standard tooling.
Hobbyists don’t want to learn every new framework. Someone can have a small business website for their activity and have been happy using jQuery since 2010.
I thought this would include more drastic changes, but it seems that this is more house cleaning stuff, like, "nobody should really be using this in 2026". They are providing a library for someone who really likes jQuery and wants to use it over something like React. (Which is completely fine and reasonable.)
> This syntax is simple to write, but to our standards, doesn’t communicate intent really well. Did the author expect one or more js-widget elements on this page? Also, if we update our page markup and accidentally leave out the js-widget classname, will an exception in the browser inform us that something went wrong? By default, jQuery silently skips the whole expresion when nothing matched the initial selector; but to us, such behavior was a bug rather than a feature.
I completely agree with this, because I have been bitten so many times by this from subtle bugs. However I can see some other people not caring about any of it.
I already know that I am definitely not going to use jQuery in my personal projects, and there is no chance that my workspace does. (I much prefer letting a framework handle rendering for me based on data binding.) So none of that concerns me. But good luck to jQuery and anyone who sticks with it.
Upload progress. The Fetch API offers no way observe and display progress when uploading a file (or making any large request). jQuery makes this possible via the `xhr` callback.
Nearly every time I write something in JavaScript, the first line is const $ = (selector) => document.querySelector(selector). I do not have jQuery nostalgia as much as many others here, but that particular shorthand is very useful.
For extra flavor, const $$ = (selector) => document.querySelectorAll(selector) on top.
Don’t let all of the old heads glazing jquery in this thread confuse you - they’re just nostalgic. There’s no reason to even think of using jquery in 2026
I used jQuery for the past ~ 10 years on smaller apps and I had no problems with it. Then I slowly replaced it with modern JS wherever possible and I found that today I am using jQuery only because Datatables.js depends on it.
It was a nice ride, many thanks to the people that worked and still work on it. Not sure we'll ever see a jQuery 5, but that's life.
I was surprised that for most of my smaller use cases, Zepto.js was a drop-in replacement that worked well. I do need to try the jQuery slim builds, I've never explored that.
jQuery is v4 now, but a lot of sites esp. wordpress still have 1.11 or 1.12 and only uses them to either doing modals(popover), show/hide(display), or ajax(fetch).
https://css-tricks.com/reactive-jquery-for-spaghetti-fied-le...
Oh the horrible things I do with Instagram...
I just try and get LLMs to do it for me because I'm lazy, and they like to use setInterval instead of mutationObservers and if it works, I just live with the inefficiency.
Anyway, jQuery always did the job, use it forever if it solves your problems.
While presumably jquery is slower than native selectors, maybe that could be pre-computed away.
const $$ = document.querySelectorAll.bind(document);
If the verbosity bothers you, you can always define an utility function with a short name (although I'm not personally a fan of this kind of things).
https://developer.mozilla.org/docs/Web/API/Document/querySel...
https://developer.mozilla.org/docs/Web/API/Document/querySel...
https://developer.mozilla.org/docs/Web/API/Element/querySele...
https://developer.mozilla.org/docs/Web/API/Element/querySele...
But you might still break stuff in your own projects. Imagine you extend a native prototype with a method, and later the native prototype starts having a method with the same name.
Newer libraries start using that new standard method.
You upgrade the libraries your website depends on, or add a dependency, and this new code happens to depend on that native prototype. Only you replaced it with your custom method, and that method likely doesn't have the exact same behavior. You broke that new code and fixing this might not be trivial because uses of your custom method are sprinkled everywhere in your code.
It only works if you ever works on projects that have zero dependencies, or dependencies you never update.
Or you could spare yourself the troubles and define a method that takes the node in parameter.
It's also a question of forming good habits: you could be working on your projects now, forming a habit of extending prototypes, but will you remember not to do this the day you write a library?
By the way, how can you be sure you won't move some of your app code to a library because you like your utility functions and would like to reuse them in another project of yours? And why not open source that shared code, so you can just install it with NPM? Bam, that stuff is a library now.
Live on jQuery! Go forth and multiply!
Has anyone done any benchmarks yet to see how jQuery 4 compares to jQuery 3.7?
It made it so much better to build apps vs. spaghetti jQuery.
I still have nightmares about jeeping track of jQuery callbacks
So the options are to 1. Code React all day and be happy with it. 2. Come up with reasons why it's bad.
There are many talented and intellectually curious people in the field which lean towards 2.
Nobody in their right mind is remembering to use `useDeferredValue` or `useEffectEvent` for their very niche uses.
These are a direct result of React's poor component lifecycle design. Compare to Vue's granular lifecycle hooks which give you all the control you need without workarounds, and they're named in a way that make sense. [1]
And don't get me started on React's sad excuse for global state management with Contexts. A performance nightmare full of entire tree rerenders on every state change, even if components aren't subscribing to that state. Want subscriptions? Gotta hand-roll everything or use a 3rd party state library which don't support initialization before your components render if your global state depends on other state/data in React-land.
1. https://vuejs.org/api/composition-api-lifecycle.html
It requires a strong design system and it probably makes it harder to use some web APIs but those can be reasonable tradeoffs
15+ years ago I wrote a tutorial for french people about using jQuery, it got a lot of views. I hope it helped spread jQuery.
Thanks guys!
https://youmightnotneedjquery.com/
Yes, sometimes the vanilla JS analogs are not the most elegant, but the vast majority are not terribly complicated either.
IMHO, another advantage of vanilla JS (aside from saving ~30KB) is potentially easier debugging. For example, I could find / debug the event listeners using the dev tools more easily when they were implemented via vanilla JS, since for complicated event listeners I had to step through a lot of jQuery code.
Whats the current behemoth instead of JQ?
I perceive it as still being the de-facto standard?
But maybe they will scope this one better: they were talking about getting 4.0 released in 2020 back in 2019!
[1]: https://github.com/jquery/jquery/pull/5077 [2]: https://github.com/jquery/jquery/issues/4299
> We also dropped support for other very old browsers, including Edge Legacy, iOS versions earlier than the last 3, Firefox versions earlier than the last 2 (aside from Firefox ESR), and Android Browser.
Safari from iOS 16, released in 2022, is more modern in every conceivable way than MSIE 11. I'd also bet there are more people stuck with iOS 16- than those who can only use IE 11, except maybe at companies with horrid IT departments, in which case I kind of see this as enabling them to continue to suck.
I'd vote to rip the bandaid off. MSIE is dead tech, deader than some of the other browsers they're deprecating. Let it fade into ignomony as soon as possible.
There are likely millions if not tens of millions of computers still running MSIE11. There are likely to be no devices running iOS 16
My iPhone X is stuck on iOS 16 with no way to upgrade.
However, the phone is still working well. Despite being in daily use for 8 years it still has 81% battery capacity, has never been dropped, has a great OLED screen, can record 4K@60 video. It is far more responsive than a brand new 2025 $200 Android phone from e.g. Xiaomi. It still gets security patches from Apple. The only real shortcoming compared to a modern iPhone is the low light camera performance. That and some app developers don't support iOS 16 anymore, so e.g. I can't use the ChatGPT app and have to use it via the browser, but the Gemini app works fine.
Statcounter says there are about 4.6% of iOS users still on iOS 16.[1]
My gut instinct is that there are multiple times more people using iOS 16 today than MSIE of any version.
[0] https://radar.cloudflare.com/reports/browser-market-share-20...
[1] https://gs.statcounter.com/os-version-market-share/ios/mobil...
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Explorer_11
In general, Windows has always belonged on a VM snapshot backing image. =3
Crazy to think that software running inside IE11 should use the latest version of a library.
Most of the changes are completely reasonable - a lot are internal cleanup that would require no code changes on the user side, dropping older browsers, etc.
But the fact that there are breaking API changes is the most surprising thing to me. Projects that still use jQuery are going to be mostly legacy projects (I myself have several lying around). Breaking changes means more of an upgrade hassle on something that's already not worth much of an upgrade hassle to begin with. Removing things like `jQuery.isArray` serve only to make the upgrade path harder - the internal jQuery function code could literally just be `Array.isArray`, but at least then you wouldn't be breaking jQuery users' existing code.
At some point in the life of projects like these, I feel like they should accept their place in history and stop themselves breaking compatibility with any of the countless thousands (millions!) of their users' projects. Just be a good clean library that one can keep using without having to think about it forever and ever.
Good times, I'm glad it is still around.
Is there still anything jquery does you cannot easily do with a couple lines of stdlib?
JQ is also used in frameworks like Bootstrap (although I think they’re trying to drop third-party dependencies like this since they tend to cause conflicts).
I have also used JQ in an Angular app where complex on-the-fly DOM manipulation just isn’t practical with standard tooling.
Incredible it's still being maintained.
Looks like the core behavior doesn't change, something that people complain about, e.g. https://github.blog/engineering/engineering-principles/remov...
> This syntax is simple to write, but to our standards, doesn’t communicate intent really well. Did the author expect one or more js-widget elements on this page? Also, if we update our page markup and accidentally leave out the js-widget classname, will an exception in the browser inform us that something went wrong? By default, jQuery silently skips the whole expresion when nothing matched the initial selector; but to us, such behavior was a bug rather than a feature.
I completely agree with this, because I have been bitten so many times by this from subtle bugs. However I can see some other people not caring about any of it.
I already know that I am definitely not going to use jQuery in my personal projects, and there is no chance that my workspace does. (I much prefer letting a framework handle rendering for me based on data binding.) So none of that concerns me. But good luck to jQuery and anyone who sticks with it.
For extra flavor, const $$ = (selector) => document.querySelectorAll(selector) on top.
It was a nice ride, many thanks to the people that worked and still work on it. Not sure we'll ever see a jQuery 5, but that's life.
[0]: https://bundlephobia.com/package/jquery@4.0.0
[1]: https://bundlephobia.com/package/preact@10.28.2
Is there some outlier place where people using virtual DOM frameworks don't also include 100-200kb of "ecosystem" in addition to the framework?
I suppose anything is possible, but I've never actually seen it. I have seen jQuery only sites. You get a lot for ~27kB.
Which is entirely the issue. Supporting a browser for the 10 users who will update jQuery in 2025 is insane.