Top SolidJS Components Libraries

BuilderIO/mitosis is a tool for writing components once and compiling them to multiple frameworks.

Code Example

import { useState } from '@builder.io/mitosis';

export default function Counter() {
  const [count, setCount] = useState(0);
  return <button onClick={() => setCount(count + 1)}>Count: {count}</button>;
}

Pros

• Enables writing components once and using them across multiple frameworks, saving development time and effort.
• Supports a wide range of popular frameworks, including React, Vue, Angular, and Solid.
• Provides a unified API for state management and component lifecycle across different frameworks.

Cons

• May introduce an additional layer of complexity compared to native framework development.
• Performance overhead due to the compilation process and abstraction layer.
• Limited community support and ecosystem compared to framework-specific solutions.

Twin.macro is a CSS-in-JS library that combines the power of Tailwind CSS with the flexibility of CSS-in-JS.

Code Example

import tw from 'twin.macro'

const Button = tw.button`bg-blue-500 hover:bg-blue-700 text-white font-bold py-2 px-4 rounded`

Pros

• Offers a unique blend of Tailwind CSS utility classes and CSS-in-JS, providing more flexibility than most other projects.
• Provides a seamless integration with popular CSS-in-JS libraries like styled-components and Emotion.
• Allows for easy customization and extension of Tailwind CSS classes within JavaScript.

Cons

• Has a steeper learning curve compared to some of the other projects, especially for developers unfamiliar with Tailwind CSS or CSS-in-JS.
• Requires additional setup and configuration compared to simpler CSS solutions or component libraries.
• May have a larger bundle size due to the inclusion of both Tailwind CSS and CSS-in-JS functionality.

Component Party is a website showcasing component syntax across various JavaScript frameworks and libraries.

Pros

• Provides a comprehensive comparison of component syntax across multiple frameworks, unlike other projects that focus on specific frameworks or tools.
• Offers a user-friendly interface for developers to quickly understand and compare different component implementations.
• Serves as an educational resource for developers looking to learn or transition between frameworks.

Cons

• Unlike BuilderIO/mitosis or ben-rogerson/twin.macro, Component Party doesn't provide actual code transformation or styling solutions.
• Lacks the interactive functionality of projects like ArtalkJS/Artalk or crashmax-dev/fireworks-js.
• May require more frequent updates to stay current with evolving framework syntaxes compared to more focused projects.

ArtalkJS/Artalk is a lightweight, self-hosted comment system for websites.

Code Example

const artalk = new Artalk({
  el: '#comments',
  server: 'https://your-artalk-server.com'
});

Pros

• Offers a self-hosted solution, providing more control over data and customization compared to BuilderIO/mitosis or ben-rogerson/twin.macro
• Focuses specifically on comment functionality, making it more specialized than general-purpose UI libraries like stefan-karger/solid-ui
• Provides a complete backend and frontend solution, unlike component-focused projects like matschik/component-party.dev

Cons

• Limited to comment functionality, unlike more versatile projects like BuilderIO/mitosis or stefan-karger/solid-ui
• Requires server setup and maintenance, which is not necessary for client-side libraries like crashmax-dev/fireworks-js
• May have a steeper learning curve for integration compared to simpler, single-purpose libraries like ascorbic/unpic-img

ascorbic/unpic-img is a multi-framework component for responsive, high-performance images.

Code Example

import { Image } from "@unpic/react";

<Image src="https://example.com/image.jpg" layout="constrained" width={800} height={600} alt="Example image" />

Pros

• Provides a unified image component across multiple frameworks, unlike framework-specific solutions.
• Focuses specifically on image optimization and responsiveness, offering more specialized features than general-purpose UI libraries.
• Simplifies the implementation of responsive images with automatic srcset generation.

Cons

• Limited to image-related functionality, unlike more comprehensive UI libraries or component collections.
• May have a steeper learning curve for developers unfamiliar with advanced image optimization techniques.
• Lacks the broader scope of projects like BuilderIO/mitosis, which aims to convert components between different frameworks.