Add to Chrome
Add to Edge
Add to Firefox
Add to Opera
Add to Brave
Add to SafariWhen comparing Mithril vs Angular, the Slant community recommends Mithril for most people. In the question“What are the best client-side JavaScript MV* frameworks?” Mithril is ranked 6th while Angular is ranked 9th. The most important reason people chose Mithril is:
Most other frameworks either offer a huge API to deal with model and view synchronization, or defer to other libraries & plugins to cater for relatively simple use cases. Mithril's API is tiny but complete. The natural reaction is to assume something is missing, but as you build you realise you incredibly fast, powerful and rich applications can be built using nothing but Mithril.
Specs
Question Ranking
Pros
Pro Small, easy to learn API
Most other frameworks either offer a huge API to deal with model and view synchronization, or defer to other libraries & plugins to cater for relatively simple use cases. Mithril's API is tiny but complete. The natural reaction is to assume something is missing, but as you build you realise you incredibly fast, powerful and rich applications can be built using nothing but Mithril.
Pro Fast rendering
Mithril's loading times are very fast. This is because it's templates are compiled first and then served to the browser and because it uses a virtual DOM. The virtual DOM is a virtual tree containing all the nodes of the real DOM, every time anything changes in the virtual DOM, Mithril does not re-render the entire (real) DOM, instead it just searches and applies the differences.
Pro No need to learn another syntax to write views
Most MVC frameworks use HTML templates to render their views. They are good and useful because they are easy to read and understand. But they add more complication to an app because it's practically a new language and syntax that needs to be learned.
Mithril argues that separating markup from logic is just a separation of technologies and not concerns, so you can write Mithril views in JavaScript. Writing them in JavaScript also makes it easier to debug them (HTML templates can't be debugged).
Pro Familiar to people used to MVC
Doesn't lock you into any complicated conventions or structures, only one function is required to create either a Controller or a View. You're free to implement your architecture exactly as you want, so you can focus on the purpose of MVC, making connections between computer data and stuff in the end user's head.
Pro Small size
Weights just 8Kb gzipped and has no dependencies. A reactive stream module can be added for one extra Kb.
Pro Great documentation
Mithril has a large and expansive documentation despite it's relatively small API. Mithril's GitHub repo has more documentation than actual source code. None of that documentation is auto-generated
Pro Allows a smooth transition from other UI frameworks
One thing you need to start using Mithril is just a DOM node. With Mithril a developer is able to introduce the library step by step.
Pro Allows you to choose which JavaScript libraries to integrate in your project
Mithril gives to the developer the flexibility to chose the best JavaScript library to use for a specific task.
A huge framework like Angular instead forces you to use their API, which does not necessarily evolve as fast as the JavaScript ecosystem. Therefore you may end up in case when you are stuck using an API which is just not the best in terms of performance
Pro Can be used without build systems
It's plain old JavaScript, can be used without webpack, gulp or grunt, just include it into your HTML and start writing your app.
Pro Does not force you into a predefined structure
Mithril's API is pretty small compared to other frameworks. It forces developers to solve problems in JavaScript rather than in Mithril. Other frameworks with massive APIs force you to think in a way that suits the framework. Mithril doesn't do that.
Pro Support for a composable component oriented architecture with directives
Angular uses the existing HTML structure and builds on top of it instead of requiring you to learn a new templating language. Because it's just vanilla HTML, it is more familiar, and easier for beginners to learn. Directives let Angular know which HTML elements are under its control, and how to use them.
Being directly on the HTML it's more transparent what's going on, and it's possible to get a good idea of what the page is doing just by looking at the template.
Also, it makes embedding possible, as you could have an angular app within an existing site so you don't have to rewrite everything at once.
Pro Easy and straightforward data-binding
Data bindings are done on the DOM, which allows you to easily sync data between various parts of the DOM in a very succint matter.
<body ng-app>
<span>Insert your name:</span>
<input type="text" ng-model="user.name" />
<h3>Echo: {{user.name}}</h3>
</body>This snippet shows how the model attribute "name" is easily bound across different parts of the DOM without having to set up any extra boilerplate.
Pro Provides dependency injection
With dependency injection, you can load in extra javascript and new functionality just when you need it.
This is particularly helpful with testing as you can swap out services for test services.
It also means in single page apps you can load dependencies only as you need them instead of loading them up all up at the start.
Pro Huge ecosystem of third party components
Angular is an extremely popular JavaScript framework. Because of this, developers have developed a myriad of components which can be downloaded and integrated into any Angular application.
Pro Huge community that is quickly growing
Angular has the largest community out of all Javascript MV* frameworks and there are a lot of tutorials and guides out there for new and old users alike.
Pro All best practices
Cons
Con Small API can make it unsuitable for larger more complex projects
Mithril's small API and small number of functions while helpful for small projects and applications where speed is needed, can add another layer of complexity in larger more complex applications where a more extensive API is needed out of the box.
Con Steep learning curve
Angular isn't a simple framework, and because much of the magic goes on behind the scenes, it isn't easy to go from simply using the framework to being able to actually change how it works and extend it.
Con It is almost mandatory to use Typescript
Although ES standard can be used, most of the documentation and resources are with Typescript.
Con HTML template does not comply to standards
Attributes are case-sensitive, which is against the HTML standards.
Con Difficult to use for isomorphic apps that render the initial template on the server in a performant way. Non issue for enterprise apps.
Con Explicit configuration
Users will usually need to specify stuff that is very obvious (template location, providers etc. ).
Con Two-way data binding is often considered an anti-pattern
Two-way data-binding means that a HTML element in the view and an Angular 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.
