When comparing Grunt vs Pint, the Slant community recommends Grunt for most people. In the question“What are the best Node.js build systems / task runners?” Grunt is ranked 6th while Pint is ranked 7th. The most important reason people chose Grunt is:
Grunt emphasizes configuration over code. As such grunt configurations are easy to write. Writing them does not require knowledge of streams, promises, concurrency, or asynchronous tasks to set up.
Specs
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
Pro Configurations are easy to write
Grunt emphasizes configuration over code. As such grunt configurations are easy to write. Writing them does not require knowledge of streams, promises, concurrency, or asynchronous tasks to set up.
Pro Has tons of plugins
Grunt has been available for a long time and during this time it has garnered a large community of dedicated developers who have made more than 4000 grunt plugins available to be used.
Pro Plugins configured out of the box
The default behaviors for most plugins is normally what you want, so if you just use a plugin without configuring it, it will work for most use cases.
Pro A GUI front-end via spock
A graphical user interface for grunt is available via spock.
Pro Choice of using it as a config file or writing your own functions
You can use Grunt as a config file or JavaScript by writing your functions via Node Modules.
Pro Grunt v1.0 alpha uses Orchestrator for maximum concurrency
Grunt version 1 alpha, aka grunt-next, the upcoming next major release of Grunt, uses Orchestrator to sequence and execute tasks and dependencies with maximum concurrency, potentially bringing it up to speed with Gulp in term of performance.
Pro An API that makes writing and using of plugins extremely easy
The API is built in such a way that if you write a Grunt task that is useful for someone else out there or would be useful for future projects, it can be easily made into a grunt plugin and then shared using npm.
Pro Shell commands inside Grunt
There is a Grunt plugin called grunt-exec which allows developers to execute shell commands inside their Grunt files. This is extremely easy if a developer is developing only in Node and constantly getting out of Node environment to run something like a git command can become frustrating.
Pro Uncertainties integration
Transparently handles calculations with quantities with uncertainties (like 3.14±0.01) meter via the uncertainties package.
Pro Supports both Python 2 and Python 3
A single codebase that runs unchanged in Python 2.7+ and Python 3.0+.
Pro NumPy compatibility
It supports a lot of numpy mathematical operations without monkey patching or wrapping numpy.
Pro Supports any numerical type
Supports fraction, float, decimal, numpy.ndarray, etc.
Pro Uses jobs to prevent bloated build files
Using Grunt in complex projects can lead to extremely bloated build files. Pint resolves this issue by introducing Jobs, a job is basically a set of Grunt tasks that are related to a particular build step. Using this method the build code remains organized in different job files, for example one for js compilation and one for CSS preprocessing. When the build process is started, Pint starts running these job files which in turn build the project.
Here's a sample Pintfile.js
further demonstrating the concept of jobs in PintJS.
Pro Faster builds with built-in concurrency
Every job in a build process may depend on something before it. A simple example would be copying of the minified files to the dist directory, this task needs to be performed after the compilation is complete. What Pint does is that it lets the user declare the dependencies within each job in a dependsOn
array. Hence whenever PintJS starts the build process it first generates an internal dependency model so that the build could be parallelized by spawning up new Grunt processes wherever possible resulting in the complete build process being concurrent (and really fast!).
Pro Takes advantage of Grunt's huge plugin ecosystem
Pint is built on Grunt, so it can use Grunt's plugins. Grunt has a plugin for pretty much any need with over 4000 plugins currently available.
Pro Simplified build lifecycle
In some projects there are tasks that aren't related to the build at all. These can be simple tasks such as pulling the GIT SHA or reading the package.json file into variables. With Pint these additional tasks can be defined in the build file too. This is made possible by providing users with an initializr and a finalizr; inside the initialize
callback, tasks such as generation of a list of test files or reading the package.json file can be defined, while in the finalize
callback users can define moving of the build files or pushing the source maps to their server.
Cons
Con Grunt compatibility issues
Changes in different versions in grunt are not always backwards-compatible.
Con Large bloated configuration files
To configure Grunt, developers need to basically write large files and configure JSON objects. While it's very powerful, the sheer complexity of it's configuration file may be a large obstacle for newcomers and developers that have not used any automation tools before. This may push them to search for simpler alternatives.
Con Grunt lost mindshare in general
Grunt can only do what the individual plugins allow it to do. New tools aren't always being made available for Grunt, nor are they always being updated as quickly, so you're stuck with an aging ecosystem.
Con The need to track creation/movement of files
Debugging and augmenting grunt pipelines are much harder than other build systems that clearly show the pipelines in the code.
Grunt works on files so you must track where each task puts files and try and intercept that in a task if you want to add something in the middle of a build pipeline.
Con Potentially unsupported
No activity on repo in 2 years as of Oct 2015
Con Configuration files are bloated and long
Pint's configuration files are the same as Grunt's. Meaning that they are long and hard to read, especially for new users.