Add to Chrome
Add to Edge
Add to Firefox
Add to Opera
Add to Brave
Add to SafariWhen comparing Deku vs Ractive, the Slant community recommends Deku for most people. In the question“What are the best React.js alternatives?” Deku is ranked 17th while Ractive is ranked 22nd. The most important reason people chose Deku is:
Functional approach.
Question Ranking
Pros
Pro Functional
Functional approach.
Pro Server side rendering
Deku can render it's components and data server side, then it sends those components as HTML to the browser.
This ensures faster initial loading time and SEO friendliness out of the box, since it's indexed as any other static website by search engines.
Pro Easy to learn
Since Deku is very lightweight and has a rather small API, there's not much to learn. It's pretty easy to get started and build something with it.
Pro Can use JSX
Developers using Deku can choose to also use JSX if they want to. This is especially helpful for people who are moving from React to Deku.
Pro Good performance
Deku's diffing algorithm is considerably faster and performs better than most libraries. The dbmonster performance mini-app written in Deku renders roughly 16% faster than other libraries.
Pro Live, reactive templating
Ractive.js is a template-driven UI library, but unlike other tools that generate inert HTML, it transforms your templates into blueprints for apps that are interactive by default.
Pro Powerful and extensible
Two-way binding, animations, SVG support and more are provided out-of-the-box – but you can add whatever functionality you need by downloading and creating plugins.
Pro Supports a true templating language
Ractive fully supports a templating language. To be more precise, views are written with a variant of Mustache, which is also extended to support inline JavaScript expressions. Soon it will be able to support other templating languages.
Pro Virtual DOM
Instead of relying on the DOM, Ractive implements a virtual DOM from scratch, allowing it to calculate precisely what needs to be patched during the next screen refresh. This is orders of magnitude faster than fiddling with the DOM itself.
Cons
Con No support for legacy browsers
Deku does not support legacy browsers, or relatively old browsers for that matter. They only support the latest versions of the major web browsers.
Con Not a lot of learning resources
Since it's a rather new library and has a small community, there are not many examples where you can learn from out there. There are also few guides and the documentation is not amazing and has some parts that should be covered better.
Con Ractive's two way binding can be a source of bugs
Two-way data-binding means that a HTML element in the view and an Ractive model are binded, and when one of them is changed so is the other. One-way data-binding for example does not change the model when the HTML element is changed.
This is a rather controversial subject and many developers consider two-way data binding an anti-pattern and something that is useless in complex applications because it's very easy to create complex situations by using it and being unable to debug them easily or understand what's happening by just looking at the code.
