Slant community chat on DiscoursePro Well documented
Documentation is thorough, well organized and full of live examples and templates ready for use. Every component and every part of the framework is explained and covered in depth.
Pro Massive userbase
Bootstrap is very popular and has a large community. As a result of this it is much easier to find help with anything you might need.
Pro Custom builds
If you don't want to download the full Bootstrap framework. Custom builds of Bootstrap can be created, including only the desired CSS, CSS components, and JavaScript components. This can be done directly from the Bootstrap website by simply choosing what components to download.
Con Limited features as a widget framework
Bootstrap is a full-featured CSS framework, which also includes some powerful prebuilt JavaScript components. However, compared to options with the main purpose of being a GUI/widget framework/tookit, there is a limited number of options with Bootstrap.
Con Depends on jQuery
Depends heavily on jQuery.
Pro Device agnostic
Since Materialize follows Google's guidelines for Material design, which in theory is device agnostic, Materialize itself is device agnostic too. It's designed to look good on every device.
Pro Customizable
While the default style is not bad at all, Materialize also gives developers the ability to customize it and fit their own style, while still keeping in line with the Material Design philosophy. Along with the CSS files, designers can also download the SASS files which can be edited and compiled.
Know any negative aspects of this option?
Pro Easy to reuse components
Since every single UI component is created independently in JavaScript, it becomes very easy to reuse them throughout your app without having to re-write them.
Pro Can be used with different libraries
ReactJS can be used independently as the only library for building the front-end, or it can be used alongside JavaScript libraries such as jQuery, or even Angular.
Con Large file size
React's react.min.js is 145.5KB in size. It's much larger than some other libraries that offer roughly the same features and it's almost the same size as some MV* frameworks such as Angular or Ember that offer more features out of the box. Although, it should be mentioned that sometim...
Con Dependency hell
With all the third party components available for React, which when used smart is a good thing, can result in huge code bloat when used dumb. Javascript sizes can go from KB to MB without doing too much though.
Pro Pretty light-weight
Inferno weighs in at 9kb gzipped, which is light-weight.
Pro Modular
Use it however you want in a framework of your own custom design. When things change in the industry, swap things out instead of being locked in by someone else's design.
Con Not very popular
Which can hinder one's opinion of its future, but the future of all "frameworks" is to break things into smaller pieces, so inferno very well might get used by the big names in the future.
Con Some React components may not work with Inferno
Inferno and React have different public and private APIs. If 3rd party components use a private API then it's almost certainly going to break when you use it with Inferno. Once React Fiber is implemented, even libraries that are currently working will break and will not be supported by Infern...
Pro Based on web components
Web Components are a collection of specifications released by W3C as a way to reduce the complexity of web apps by creating reusable components. Browser support is currently poor for web components, however Polymer is developed to make web components compatible with modern browsers.
Con Lack of browser support
Due to web components being so new, there is still a lot of issues with browser compatibility. Though Polymer has solved some of these compatibility issues with polyfills, there is still a lot of bugs and unpredictability.
Pro Globalization support
jQuery UI has internationalization (globalization) support.
Pro Cross-browser compatibility
jQuery UI, like jQuery has great cross-browser and backward compatibility with the most popular browsers on the market.
Con Slow development
jQuery UI development is rather slow and new features or components are not released frequently.
Pro Not only web apps
Dojo is not used only for web development. The widgets featured in Dojo can also be used to create mobile user interfaces.
Pro Highly modular
Dojo Toolkit is a highly modular framework. It uses AMD modules and the module system is extremely powerful and easy to learn.
Con Not able to keep up with the future of the web
The web is moving towards web components, something that Dojo does not implement. In its current state Dojo badly needs more abstraction and it also needs to provide some form of modern application architecture.
Welcome to the Slant Community
Stop spending hours researching
Slant is written by a community helping you be informed. Let us know what you’re passionate about to get an awesome personalized feed.