Pros of Mermaid

• More mature and widely adopted project with a larger community
• Supports a broader range of diagram types (flowcharts, sequence diagrams, Gantt charts, etc.)
• Extensive documentation and examples available

Cons of Mermaid

• Steeper learning curve due to more complex syntax
• Larger file size and potentially slower rendering for complex diagrams

Code Comparison

Mermaid example:

graph TD
    A[Start] --> B{Is it?}
    B -->|Yes| C[OK]
    B -->|No| D[End]

Graffle example:

const g = graffle`
  (Start) -> [Is it?]
  [Is it?] -> (OK) {label: Yes}
  [Is it?] -> (End) {label: No}
`

Summary

Mermaid is a more established and feature-rich diagramming tool, offering support for various diagram types and extensive documentation. However, it may have a steeper learning curve and potentially slower rendering for complex diagrams. Graffle, on the other hand, appears to have a simpler syntax and potentially faster rendering, but with fewer diagram types and a smaller community. The choice between the two depends on the specific needs of the project and the user's preference for syntax complexity versus simplicity.

Pros of PlantUML

• Widely adopted and supported in various tools and platforms
• Extensive documentation and large community for support
• Supports a wide range of diagram types beyond just UML

Cons of PlantUML

• Syntax can be verbose and less intuitive for beginners
• Limited customization options for diagram styling
• Slower rendering performance for complex diagrams

Code Comparison

PlantUML:

@startuml
Alice -> Bob: Hello
Bob --> Alice: Hi there
@enduml

Graffle:

graph(`
  Alice -> Bob: Hello
  Bob -> Alice: Hi there
`)

Summary

PlantUML is a mature and widely-used tool for creating various types of diagrams, including UML. It offers extensive documentation and community support. However, its syntax can be verbose, and customization options are limited.

Graffle, on the other hand, is a newer project that aims to provide a simpler and more intuitive syntax for creating diagrams. It focuses on graph-based diagrams and offers a JavaScript-based approach. While it may not have the same level of adoption or feature set as PlantUML, it provides a more streamlined experience for certain types of diagrams.

The choice between the two depends on specific requirements, such as the types of diagrams needed, integration with existing tools, and the preferred syntax style.

Pros of Kroki

• Supports a wide range of diagram types (20+), including PlantUML, Mermaid, and GraphViz
• Offers multiple deployment options: Docker, CLI, and web service
• Actively maintained with regular updates and contributions

Cons of Kroki

• Requires external dependencies for each diagram type
• May have a steeper learning curve due to the variety of supported formats
• Potentially higher resource usage when running as a service

Code Comparison

Kroki (Docker usage):

docker run -d -p 8000:8000 yuzutech/kroki
curl -X POST --data-raw 'digraph G {Hello->World}' http://localhost:8000/graphviz/svg

Graffle (JavaScript usage):

import { graffle } from 'graffle'

const svg = graffle`
  graph TD
    A-->B
`

Summary

Kroki offers a comprehensive solution for generating various types of diagrams, with multiple deployment options and broad format support. However, it may require more setup and resources compared to Graffle. Graffle, on the other hand, provides a simpler JavaScript-based approach but with more limited diagram types. The choice between the two depends on the specific needs of the project, such as the variety of diagrams required and the preferred integration method.

Pros of d2

• More active development with frequent updates and contributions
• Broader range of diagram types and features
• Better documentation and examples

Cons of d2

• Steeper learning curve due to more complex syntax
• Larger codebase, potentially harder to customize or extend

Code Comparison

d2:

shape: sequence_diagram
alice -> bob: Hello
bob -> alice: Hi

graffle:

const diagram = graffle.new()
diagram.add(graffle.box('Alice'))
diagram.add(graffle.box('Bob'))
diagram.add(graffle.arrow('Alice', 'Bob', 'Hello'))

Summary

d2 offers a more comprehensive diagramming solution with a wider range of features and diagram types. It has a more active community and better documentation. However, this comes at the cost of a steeper learning curve and a more complex codebase.

graffle, on the other hand, provides a simpler, JavaScript-based approach to creating diagrams. It may be easier to integrate into existing JavaScript projects but offers fewer features and diagram types compared to d2.

The choice between the two depends on the specific needs of the project, the desired level of complexity, and the preferred programming language or environment.

Pros of Excalidraw

• More feature-rich and mature project with a larger community
• Offers a complete drawing application with a user interface
• Supports collaborative editing and real-time collaboration

Cons of Excalidraw

• Larger codebase and potentially more complex to contribute to
• May have more dependencies and a steeper learning curve
• Focused on a specific use case (whiteboard-style drawings)

Code Comparison

Excalidraw (React component usage):

import { Excalidraw } from "@excalidraw/excalidraw";

<Excalidraw
  initialData={initialData}
  onChange={(elements, state) => console.log("Elements :", elements, "State : ", state)}
/>

Graffle (Node.js usage):

const graffle = require('graffle')

const diagram = graffle.create()
diagram.addNode('A')
diagram.addNode('B')
diagram.addEdge('A', 'B')

Excalidraw is a full-featured drawing application with a web-based interface, while Graffle appears to be a simpler library for creating diagrams programmatically. Excalidraw offers a more comprehensive solution for collaborative drawing, but Graffle might be easier to integrate into existing Node.js projects for generating diagrams.

Pros of draw.io

• More comprehensive and feature-rich diagramming tool
• Supports a wide range of diagram types and export formats
• Active development with frequent updates and improvements

Cons of draw.io

• Larger codebase and more complex architecture
• Steeper learning curve for new users
• Heavier resource usage due to its extensive feature set

Code Comparison

draw.io (JavaScript):

mxGraph.prototype.insertVertex = function(parent, id, value, x, y, width, height, style, relative)
{
  var vertex = this.createVertex(parent, id, value, x, y, width, height, style, relative);
  return this.addCell(vertex, parent);
};

Graffle (TypeScript):

export function createNode(
  graph: Graph,
  options: CreateNodeOptions
): Node {
  const node = new Node(options);
  graph.addNode(node);
  return node;
}

Summary

draw.io is a more comprehensive diagramming tool with a wider range of features, while Graffle appears to be a simpler, more focused library. draw.io's extensive capabilities come at the cost of increased complexity and resource usage, whereas Graffle likely offers a more streamlined experience for specific use cases.