Add to Chrome
Add to Edge
Add to Firefox
Add to Opera
Add to Brave
Add to SafariWhen comparing Blocks.js vs Inferno, the Slant community recommends Blocks.js for most people. In the question“What are the best JavaScript libraries for building a UI?” Blocks.js is ranked 10th while Inferno is ranked 15th. The most important reason people chose Blocks.js is:
Blocks.js is just 16.5KB minified and gzipped. So it's pretty small.
Specs
Question Ranking
Pros
Pro Small footprint
Blocks.js is just 16.5KB minified and gzipped. So it's pretty small.
Pro Modular structure
Apps developed with blocks.js are modular in structure and make use of reusable objects. This makes these applications very maintainable.
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.
Pro Pretty light-weight
Inferno weighs in at 9kb gzipped, which is light-weight.
Pro Fast performance
Inferno is one of the fastest UI libraries around and widely considered the fastest.
Pro React compatability
Using the Inferno compatibility package ("inferno-compat"), Inferno can support the vast majority of React codebases.
Cons
Con Relatively new
Blocks.js is a relatively new library. It doesn't have much support and there re not many people who use it. So if you run into any problems it would be hard to get solutions.
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 Inferno.
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.
