Unpacked size is greater than esprima & espree. Speed is similar

[80avin]

I was comparing it with other alternatives like esprima and espree.
From what I found, esprima & espree have lot of features but have smaller Unpacked size as reported by npm.

It is relatively faster, but considering the small scope of it's features, I don't think that performance gain is beneficial. (Like if we have to run small expressions, then every library does it within 20ms and 10-20ms is not big gain).

For reference,

criteria	jsep	esprima	espree
Unpacked size	388kB	314kB	76.4kB
Features	minimal	complete JS	complete JS
benchmark time	274	491	417

benchmark code

import jsep from 'jsep';
import * as espree from 'espree';
import * as esprima from 'esprima';
import {Bench} from 'tinybench';

const script = '2+'.repeat(1000) + '1';

const bench = new Bench({time: 100});
bench
  .add('jsep', () => {jsep(script)})
  .add('esprima', () => {esprima.parseScript(script)})
  .add('espree', () => {espree.parse(script)})
    ;

bench.run().then(t => console.table(t.map(tt => ({name: tt.name, avg: tt.result.mean*1000, var: tt.result.variance*1000})))).catch(e => console.error(e))
/* Console
┌─────────┬───────────┬────────────────────┬────────────────────┐
│ (index) │   name    │        avg         │        var         │
├─────────┼───────────┼────────────────────┼────────────────────┤
│    0    │  'jsep'   │ 274.0221922120003  │  49.0996204188163  │
│    1    │ 'esprima' │ 491.28853894916233 │ 286.50706192948815 │
│    2    │ 'espree'  │ 417.70407563696307 │ 304.5463155112307  │
└─────────┴───────────┴────────────────────┴────────────────────┘
*/

After this, I became curious to know what is the selling point of jsep and why/when should one prefer it over others ?

[Strate]

I think that npm reports unpacked size of all files in package (not only executable code). jsep ships with 3 different bundles (commonjs, iife, module) and sourcemaps for this