I keep thinking that the code looks the same everywhere, so just wondering on what could be the difference.
No difference at all, "vanilla js" is just a way to refer to native (standards-based, non-extended) JavaScript. Generally in context it is a term to contrast with using libraries and frameworks (jQuery, React, etc).
Websites like vanilla-js.com play it up as a joke by talking about Vanilla JS as though it was a framework. That does muddy the water a little.
Also it can be a little philosophical given how many things compile to vanilla javascript without being vanilla js themselves.
A simple guideline might be: if you can write the code and run it in any current browser without additional tools or compile steps, it's vanilla js.
Vanilla JS/just JS refers to ES5/6/7, just raw JS. Non-vanilla would be stuff like angular/jquery/typescript etc.
There is 0 difference!
The term "Vanilla JS" became more and more popular after this satire website came out. My friend Francois-Xavier tells the whole story behind the "Vanilla JS framework" joke in this post. But yeah, basically Vanilla JS = plain JS = JS 🍦
Both are same. We call it vanilla while others are libraries like Jquery which simplifies DOM scripting.
Todd
Software Security TechLead
This is what happens when so many people are using so many frameworks that it becomes a special thing to not use a framework or helper library!
Don't get me wrong, everyone uses libraries in programming. Even in C, for example, I'm importing <windows.h> or <stdio.h>. But, for website building, using JS frameworks and libraries seems to be more common... Likely because many sites need to get up and running as fast and possible and/or are lower-budget projects than say, Oracle Database.