accompanist

Pros of Material Components for Android

• Comprehensive set of pre-built UI components following Material Design guidelines
• Official Google library with extensive documentation and support
• Seamless integration with Android's native UI elements

Cons of Material Components for Android

• Larger library size, potentially increasing app size
• Less flexibility for customization compared to Accompanist
• Primarily focused on traditional Android Views, not Jetpack Compose

Code Comparison

Material Components for Android:

MaterialButton(
    onClick = { /* Handle click */ },
    text = "Click me"
)

Accompanist:

Button(
    onClick = { /* Handle click */ },
    colors = ButtonDefaults.buttonColors(backgroundColor = MaterialTheme.colors.primary)
) {
    Text("Click me")
}

Summary

Material Components for Android offers a comprehensive set of pre-built UI components following Material Design guidelines, while Accompanist provides a collection of libraries to complement Jetpack Compose. Material Components is more suitable for traditional Android development, while Accompanist is tailored for Compose-based projects. The choice between the two depends on the project's requirements, target platform, and development approach.

Pros of Lottie-Android

• Specialized for complex animations: Lottie excels in rendering intricate, high-quality animations exported from After Effects
• Cross-platform support: Works across Android, iOS, and web platforms
• Large ecosystem: Extensive library of pre-made animations available on LottieFiles

Cons of Lottie-Android

• Limited scope: Focused solely on animations, while Accompanist offers a broader range of UI utilities
• Steeper learning curve: Requires familiarity with After Effects for creating custom animations
• Potentially larger app size: May increase APK size due to animation assets

Code Comparison

Lottie-Android:

val compositionResult = rememberLottieComposition(LottieCompositionSpec.Asset("animation.json"))
LottieAnimation(
    composition = compositionResult.value,
    iterations = LottieConstants.IterateForever,
)

Accompanist:

val pagerState = rememberPagerState()
HorizontalPager(
    count = 5,
    state = pagerState,
) { page ->
    Text("Page: $page")
}

This comparison highlights the specialized nature of Lottie-Android for animations, while Accompanist provides a broader set of UI utilities for Jetpack Compose. The code snippets demonstrate the different focus areas of each library.

Pros of awesome-android-ui

• Comprehensive collection of UI libraries and components
• Covers a wide range of UI elements and design patterns
• Community-driven with contributions from various developers

Cons of awesome-android-ui

• Not actively maintained, with less frequent updates
• Lacks official Google support and integration with Jetpack Compose
• May include outdated or deprecated libraries

Code Comparison

awesome-android-ui:

<com.github.johnpersano.supertoasts.SuperActivityToast
    android:id="@+id/super_toast"
    android:layout_width="match_parent"
    android:layout_height="wrap_content" />

accompanist:

@Composable
fun SystemUiController(content: @Composable () -> Unit) {
    val systemUiController = rememberSystemUiController()
    SideEffect {
        systemUiController.setSystemBarsColor(Color.Transparent)
    }
    content()
}

Summary

awesome-android-ui is a curated list of Android UI libraries, offering a wide variety of components and design patterns. It's community-driven and covers many UI elements. However, it may include outdated libraries and lacks official Google support.

accompanist, on the other hand, is an official Google project focused on Jetpack Compose. It provides a set of extension libraries for Compose, ensuring better integration and up-to-date compatibility with the latest Android development practices.

Pros of Material Dialogs

• Focused specifically on creating and customizing dialogs
• Extensive documentation and examples
• Supports both Kotlin and Java

Cons of Material Dialogs

• Limited to dialog-related functionality
• May require additional dependencies for more complex use cases

Code Comparison

Material Dialogs:

MaterialDialog(this).show {
    title(R.string.your_title)
    message(R.string.your_message)
    positiveButton(R.string.agree)
    negativeButton(R.string.disagree)
}

Accompanist:

@Composable
fun DialogExample() {
    AlertDialog(
        onDismissRequest = { /* ... */ },
        title = { Text("Your Title") },
        text = { Text("Your Message") },
        confirmButton = { Button(onClick = { /* ... */ }) { Text("Agree") } },
        dismissButton = { Button(onClick = { /* ... */ }) { Text("Disagree") } }
    )
}

Summary

Material Dialogs is a specialized library for creating and customizing dialogs in Android applications. It offers extensive documentation and examples, making it easy to implement various dialog types. However, its focus is limited to dialogs, which may require additional libraries for other UI components.

Accompanist, on the other hand, is a collection of Jetpack Compose libraries that cover a wider range of UI components and functionalities. While it may not have as extensive dialog-specific features as Material Dialogs, it provides a more comprehensive set of tools for modern Android development using Compose.

Pros of QMUI_Android

• Comprehensive UI component library with a wide range of pre-built elements
• Extensive documentation and examples in Chinese, beneficial for Chinese developers
• Longer development history and more mature codebase

Cons of QMUI_Android

• Limited support for Jetpack Compose, primarily focused on traditional Android Views
• Less frequent updates compared to Accompanist
• Steeper learning curve due to the large number of components and features

Code Comparison

QMUI_Android (XML-based layout):

<com.qmuiteam.qmui.widget.QMUITopBar
    android:id="@+id/topbar"
    android:layout_width="match_parent"
    android:layout_height="wrap_content"
    app:qmui_topbar_title="QMUI TopBar" />

Accompanist (Jetpack Compose):

TopAppBar(
    title = { Text("Accompanist TopAppBar") },
    backgroundColor = MaterialTheme.colors.primarySurface
)

QMUI_Android focuses on traditional Android Views with XML layouts, while Accompanist is designed for Jetpack Compose, offering more modern and declarative UI components. QMUI_Android provides a broader range of UI elements but may require more setup, whereas Accompanist integrates seamlessly with Compose-based projects and offers a more concise API.

Pros of Balloon

• Focused specifically on creating tooltips and popups
• Simpler API for basic use cases
• Includes built-in animations and customization options

Cons of Balloon

• Limited to tooltip/popup functionality
• Less integration with other Jetpack Compose components
• Smaller community and fewer contributors

Code Comparison

Balloon:

Balloon.Builder(context)
    .setArrowSize(10)
    .setBackgroundColor(ContextCompat.getColor(context, R.color.colorPrimary))
    .setLifecycleOwner(lifecycleOwner)
    .build()
    .showAlignBottom(anchor)

Accompanist:

Popup(
    alignment = Alignment.BottomCenter,
    offset = IntOffset(0, -10),
    properties = PopupProperties(focusable = true)
) {
    Surface(
        color = MaterialTheme.colors.primary,
        shape = MaterialTheme.shapes.medium
    ) {
        // Popup content
    }
}

Summary

Balloon is a specialized library for creating tooltips and popups, offering a simpler API and built-in customization options. Accompanist, on the other hand, is a broader collection of utilities for Jetpack Compose, providing more flexibility and integration with other Compose components. While Balloon may be easier to use for basic tooltip scenarios, Accompanist offers more extensive functionality for complex UI requirements in Compose applications.