Pros of react-redux

• Well-established ecosystem with extensive documentation and community support
• Powerful DevTools for debugging and time-travel debugging
• Middleware support for handling side effects and async operations

Cons of react-redux

• Steeper learning curve due to additional concepts like actions and reducers
• More boilerplate code required for setup and state management
• Can lead to over-engineering for simpler applications

Code Comparison

react-redux:

import { useSelector, useDispatch } from 'react-redux';

function Counter() {
  const count = useSelector(state => state.count);
  const dispatch = useDispatch();
  return (
    <button onClick={() => dispatch({ type: 'INCREMENT' })}>
      Count: {count}
    </button>
  );
}

react-tracked:

import { useTracked } from 'react-tracked';

function Counter() {
  const [state, setState] = useTracked();
  return (
    <button onClick={() => setState(s => ({ ...s, count: s.count + 1 }))}>
      Count: {state.count}
    </button>
  );
}

react-tracked offers a simpler API with less boilerplate, making it easier to use for smaller projects. However, react-redux provides more robust tools for complex state management in larger applications. The choice between the two depends on the project's scale and requirements.

Pros of mobx-react-lite

• More mature and widely adopted ecosystem
• Better performance for large-scale applications
• Seamless integration with existing MobX projects

Cons of mobx-react-lite

• Steeper learning curve for developers new to MobX
• Requires more boilerplate code for setup and configuration
• Less flexible for fine-grained optimizations

Code Comparison

react-tracked:

import { Provider, useTracked } from 'react-tracked';

const [state, setState] = useTracked();
setState(prev => ({ ...prev, count: prev.count + 1 }));

mobx-react-lite:

import { observer } from 'mobx-react-lite';
import { makeAutoObservable } from 'mobx';

class Store {
  count = 0;
  constructor() {
    makeAutoObservable(this);
  }
  increment() {
    this.count++;
  }
}

const MyComponent = observer(({ store }) => (
  <button onClick={() => store.increment()}>{store.count}</button>
));

Summary

react-tracked offers a simpler API and easier setup for React projects, making it ideal for smaller to medium-sized applications. It provides fine-grained reactivity without the need for decorators or complex store configurations.

mobx-react-lite, on the other hand, is better suited for larger applications with complex state management needs. It offers robust performance optimizations and seamless integration with the broader MobX ecosystem, but comes with a steeper learning curve and more verbose setup process.

Pros of zustand

• Simpler API with less boilerplate code
• Better TypeScript support out of the box
• More flexible, allowing for middleware and custom store enhancers

Cons of zustand

• Lacks automatic memoization and re-render optimization
• May require more manual performance tuning for complex state structures
• Doesn't provide built-in context-based state isolation

Code Comparison

react-tracked:

const useValue = () => useState({ count: 0 });
const { Provider, useTracked } = createContainer(useValue);

const Counter = () => {
  const [state, setState] = useTracked();
  return <button onClick={() => setState(s => ({ ...s, count: s.count + 1 }))}>
    {state.count}
  </button>;
};

zustand:

const useStore = create(set => ({
  count: 0,
  increment: () => set(state => ({ count: state.count + 1 }))
}));

const Counter = () => {
  const count = useStore(state => state.count);
  const increment = useStore(state => state.increment);
  return <button onClick={increment}>{count}</button>;
};

Both libraries aim to simplify state management in React applications, but they take different approaches. react-tracked focuses on optimizing re-renders and providing a more React-like API, while zustand offers a more flexible and lightweight solution with a focus on simplicity and ease of use.

Pros of Query

• Robust caching and synchronization features for remote data fetching
• Built-in support for pagination, infinite scrolling, and optimistic updates
• Large ecosystem with adapters for various frameworks and libraries

Cons of Query

• Steeper learning curve due to more complex API and concepts
• Potentially overkill for simple state management needs
• Larger bundle size compared to lightweight solutions

Code Comparison

React Tracked:

import { createContainer } from 'react-tracked';

const useValue = () => useState({ count: 0 });
const { Provider, useTracked } = createContainer(useValue);

function Counter() {
  const [state, setState] = useTracked();
  return <button onClick={() => setState(s => ({ ...s, count: s.count + 1 }))}>
    {state.count}
  </button>;
}

Query:

import { useQuery, QueryClient, QueryClientProvider } from '@tanstack/react-query';

const queryClient = new QueryClient();

function Counter() {
  const { data, refetch } = useQuery(['counter'], () => fetchCount());
  return <button onClick={() => refetch()}>
    {data?.count ?? 'Loading...'}
  </button>;
}

React Tracked focuses on simple state management with minimal boilerplate, while Query excels in handling complex data fetching scenarios with advanced caching and synchronization features.

Pros of Recoil

• Developed and maintained by Facebook, ensuring long-term support and updates
• Offers advanced features like atom effects and selectors for complex state management
• Provides built-in performance optimizations and time-travel debugging capabilities

Cons of Recoil

• Steeper learning curve due to its unique concepts and API
• Requires wrapping the entire app with RecoilRoot, which may not be ideal for gradual adoption
• Larger bundle size compared to React Tracked

Code Comparison

Recoil:

import { atom, useRecoilState } from 'recoil';

const counterState = atom({
  key: 'counterState',
  default: 0,
});

function Counter() {
  const [count, setCount] = useRecoilState(counterState);
  return <button onClick={() => setCount(count + 1)}>{count}</button>;
}

React Tracked:

import { createContainer } from 'react-tracked';

const useValue = () => useState({ count: 0 });
const { Provider, useTracked } = createContainer(useValue);

function Counter() {
  const [state, setState] = useTracked();
  return <button onClick={() => setState({ count: state.count + 1 })}>{state.count}</button>;
}

Both libraries offer efficient state management solutions for React applications, with Recoil providing more advanced features at the cost of complexity, while React Tracked focuses on simplicity and ease of use.