imove

Pros of Butterfly

• More comprehensive documentation and examples
• Larger community and more frequent updates
• Supports a wider range of diagram types and customization options

Cons of Butterfly

• Steeper learning curve due to more complex API
• Heavier package size, which may impact load times
• Less focus on low-code/no-code development compared to iMove

Code Comparison

Butterfly:

import { Canvas } from 'butterfly-dag';

const canvas = new Canvas({
  root: document.getElementById('dag-canvas'),
  disLinkable: true,
  linkable: true,
  draggable: true,
});

iMove:

import { Graph } from '@antv/x6';

const graph = new Graph({
  container: document.getElementById('container'),
  grid: true,
  autoResize: true,
});

Both libraries provide ways to create and manipulate diagrams, but Butterfly offers more built-in features and configuration options out of the box. iMove, on the other hand, focuses on simplicity and ease of use for creating flow-based applications.

Butterfly is better suited for complex, large-scale diagramming needs, while iMove excels in creating simpler, flow-based applications with a low-code approach. The choice between the two depends on the specific requirements of your project and the level of customization needed.

Pros of X6

• More comprehensive and feature-rich graph visualization library
• Better documentation and examples
• Larger community and more frequent updates

Cons of X6

• Steeper learning curve due to its extensive API
• Potentially heavier and slower for simpler use cases

Code Comparison

X6:

import { Graph } from '@antv/x6';

const graph = new Graph({
  container: document.getElementById('container'),
  width: 800,
  height: 600,
});

graph.addNode({
  x: 100,
  y: 100,
  width: 80,
  height: 40,
  label: 'Hello',
});

imove:

import { Graph } from '@antv/g6';

const graph = new Graph({
  container: 'container',
  width: 800,
  height: 600,
});

graph.data({
  nodes: [{ id: 'node1', x: 100, y: 100, label: 'Hello' }],
});
graph.render();

Summary

X6 offers a more robust and feature-rich solution for graph visualization, with better documentation and community support. However, it may be overkill for simpler projects. imove, while less comprehensive, might be easier to get started with for basic graph needs. The code comparison shows that X6 has a more object-oriented approach, while imove uses a data-driven model for rendering graphs.

Pros of mxgraph

• More mature and widely adopted project with extensive documentation
• Supports a broader range of diagram types and use cases
• Offers both client-side and server-side rendering options

Cons of mxgraph

• Steeper learning curve due to its comprehensive feature set
• Larger file size and potentially higher resource consumption
• Less focus on modern web technologies and frameworks

Code Comparison

mxgraph:

var graph = new mxGraph(container);
var parent = graph.getDefaultParent();
graph.getModel().beginUpdate();
try {
  var v1 = graph.insertVertex(parent, null, 'Hello,', 20, 20, 80, 30);
  var v2 = graph.insertVertex(parent, null, 'World!', 200, 150, 80, 30);
  var e1 = graph.insertEdge(parent, null, '', v1, v2);
} finally {
  graph.getModel().endUpdate();
}

imove:

import { Graph } from '@antv/x6';

const graph = new Graph({
  container: document.getElementById('container'),
  width: 800,
  height: 600,
});

const source = graph.addNode({
  x: 100,
  y: 100,
  label: 'Hello',
});

const target = graph.addNode({
  x: 300,
  y: 200,
  label: 'World',
});

graph.addEdge({
  source,
  target,
});

Pros of react-diagrams

• More mature and actively maintained project with frequent updates
• Extensive documentation and examples for easier implementation
• Highly customizable with a flexible API for advanced use cases

Cons of react-diagrams

• Steeper learning curve due to its complexity and extensive features
• Larger bundle size, which may impact performance in some applications
• Less focused on low-code/no-code workflows compared to imove

Code Comparison

react-diagrams:

import createEngine, { DiagramModel, DefaultNodeModel } from '@projectstorm/react-diagrams';

const engine = createEngine();
const model = new DiagramModel();
const node1 = new DefaultNodeModel('Node 1', 'rgb(0,192,255)');
node1.setPosition(100, 100);
model.addAll(node1);

imove:

import { Graph } from '@antv/x6';

const graph = new Graph({
  container: document.getElementById('container'),
  width: 800,
  height: 600,
});
const node = graph.addNode({ x: 100, y: 100, label: 'Node 1' });

Both libraries provide ways to create and manipulate diagram elements, but react-diagrams offers a more object-oriented approach with its engine and model system, while imove (based on AntV X6) provides a simpler API for basic diagram creation.

Pros of Rete

• More versatile and can be used for various types of visual programming
• Extensive documentation and examples available
• Larger community and more frequent updates

Cons of Rete

• Steeper learning curve due to its flexibility
• May require more setup and configuration for specific use cases

Code Comparison

Rete:

const numComponent = new Rete.Component('Number');
numComponent.addOutput(new Rete.Output('num', 'Number'));
numComponent.addControl(new NumControl(this.editor, 'num'));

iMove:

const node = {
  type: 'number',
  outputs: { result: 'number' },
  data: { value: 0 },
};

Key Differences

• Rete offers a more modular approach, allowing for custom components and controls
• iMove focuses on workflow automation and has a simpler API
• Rete provides more granular control over node behavior and appearance
• iMove is tailored for React applications, while Rete is framework-agnostic

Use Cases

• Rete: Visual programming editors, node-based interfaces, complex data flow systems
• iMove: Workflow automation, simple drag-and-drop interfaces, React-based applications

Both projects aim to provide visual programming interfaces, but Rete offers more flexibility at the cost of complexity, while iMove provides a simpler solution specifically for React-based workflow automation.

Pros of bpmn-js

• More mature and widely adopted in the BPMN modeling community
• Extensive documentation and examples available
• Supports BPMN 2.0 standard out of the box

Cons of bpmn-js

• Steeper learning curve for developers new to BPMN
• Less flexibility for custom workflow implementations
• Heavier library size due to comprehensive BPMN support

Code Comparison

bpmn-js:

import BpmnModeler from 'bpmn-js/lib/Modeler';

const modeler = new BpmnModeler({
  container: '#canvas',
  keyboard: { bindTo: document }
});

modeler.importXML(bpmnXML);

imove:

import { Graph } from '@antv/x6';

const graph = new Graph({
  container: document.getElementById('container'),
  width: 800,
  height: 600,
});

graph.fromJSON(data);

Summary

bpmn-js is a specialized tool for BPMN modeling, offering robust support for the BPMN 2.0 standard. It's well-documented and widely adopted but may be overkill for simpler workflow needs. imove, on the other hand, is more flexible and lightweight, making it easier to customize for specific workflow requirements. However, it lacks built-in BPMN support and may require more development effort for complex BPMN implementations.