When comparing Curl.js vs rollup.js, the Slant community recommends rollup.js for most people. In the question“What are the best RequireJS alternatives?” rollup.js is ranked 3rd while Curl.js is ranked 6th. The most important reason people chose rollup.js is:
Tree shaking can significantly reduce the size of your bundle by getting rid of unused code from the libraries you are using.
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
Pro Size ~4KB (gzipped)
Pro Async loading on demand
Async loading on demand including loadings from cdns. For example it is easy to load jquery from cdn as a module. The same thing is not that easy to achieve in Webpack
Pro Provides legacy loader
Legacy loader supports loading of plain js files and exporting globals or even expressions.
Pro AMD & CJS module support
Supports both AMD and CommonJS modules.
Pro Provides tree shaking
Tree shaking can significantly reduce the size of your bundle by getting rid of unused code from the libraries you are using.
Pro Reactjs droped Webpack and is now using rollup
Pro Outputs almost any module format
AMD, CommonJS, ES2015, Globals and UMD are all supported.
Pro Easy to configure
Rollup is very easy ton configure through a JSON file.
Pro Supports plugins
Rollup can be expanded just like webpack and browserify through the use of plugins. Plugins can do things such as transpilation (e.g. with Babel), import data from non JS places (like JSON files), etc.
Cons
Con Development has stopped
The maintainers have announced that all development for CurlJS has stopped, at least for the foreseeable future.
Con Relatively new
Rollup is still relatively new so it may be a bit harder to find information on how to do some things with it. In addition, that means that plugins can be a little scarce and it may be subject to minor changes as it matures.