When comparing Paths.js vs Processing.js, the Slant community recommends Processing.js for most people. In the question“What are the best JavaScript drawing libraries?” Processing.js is ranked 4th while Paths.js is ranked 21st.
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
Pro Just helps building graphs, complements template engines or data-binding libraries
Can be used together with a template engine such as Mustache or Handlebars to display SVG graphics or instead of a static template engine, you can use a data binding or MVC/MV* library, such as Ractive.js, Angular, Mithril or Facebook React.
Pro 3 APIs for the price of one
3 APIs of increasing abstraction:
- Low-level (svg paths)
- Basic shapes (Polygon, Rectangle, Bezier, Sector, Connector etc..)
- Basic graphs (Pie, bar, stock, radar, tree, waterfall, sankey etc...)
There is no magic, you can have as much control as you want on how you define your graphs, source code very readable.
Pro Lightweight
18kb minified.
Pro Good at creating complex visual effects and filters
Pro Fast rendering of complex scenes
Because Processing doesn't keep track of shape objects it's more efficient than other libraries. Processing can do more complicated effects faster than other libraries. Although this means you have to keep track of more yourself in your code, it also means you have more control over the finer details of how things are rendered.
Pro Cross-platform compatibility
In processing you can write code in both JavaScript and Processing code. This allows you to use existing Processing code on the client side.
Processing code is similar to Java in that it has static typing. This can make more complex calculations more robust, and less likely to cause conflicts.
The library takes a more frame based approach to rendering, so you use drawing functions to draw directly to the frame without objects. This can make it easier to write efficient full frame rendering scenes and post processing effects.