Pros of GSAP

• More comprehensive animation toolkit with advanced features like timelines and plugins
• Larger community and ecosystem, with extensive documentation and examples
• Better performance, especially for complex animations

Cons of GSAP

• Larger file size and potentially steeper learning curve
• Commercial license required for some use cases
• More opinionated API, which may not suit all project styles

Code Comparison

Shifty:

var tween = new Tweenable();
tween.tween({
  from: { x: 0 },
  to: { x: 100 },
  duration: 1000,
  easing: 'easeInOutQuad'
});

GSAP:

gsap.to("#myElement", {
  x: 100,
  duration: 1,
  ease: "power2.inOut"
});

Summary

Shifty is a lightweight tweening engine focused on simplicity and flexibility. It's ideal for projects that require basic animations and prefer a smaller footprint.

GSAP is a more powerful and feature-rich animation library, offering advanced capabilities and better performance for complex animations. It's well-suited for projects that demand sophisticated animation sequences and can benefit from its extensive ecosystem.

The choice between the two depends on the project's specific requirements, complexity of animations needed, and performance considerations.

Pros of anime

• Larger community and more frequent updates
• Supports a wider range of animation properties
• Offers more advanced features like timeline and playback control

Cons of anime

• Larger file size, which may impact load times
• Steeper learning curve due to more complex API
• May be overkill for simple animations

Code Comparison

anime:

anime({
  targets: '.element',
  translateX: 250,
  rotate: '1turn',
  duration: 800,
  easing: 'easeInOutQuad'
});

shifty:

var tweenable = new Tweenable();
tweenable.tween({
  from: { x: 0, rotation: 0 },
  to: { x: 250, rotation: 360 },
  duration: 800,
  easing: 'easeInOutQuad'
});

Both libraries allow for smooth animations with easing functions, but anime provides a more concise syntax and built-in support for CSS transforms. Shifty requires manual updating of element properties, while anime handles this automatically.

anime is generally more feature-rich and widely adopted, making it suitable for complex animations and projects requiring extensive animation capabilities. Shifty, on the other hand, is lighter and may be preferable for simpler use cases or projects where minimizing file size is crucial.

Pros of tween.js

• More comprehensive documentation and examples
• Wider community adoption and longer development history
• Built-in support for color tweening and string interpolation

Cons of tween.js

• Larger file size and potentially higher overhead
• Less modular architecture compared to Shifty's plugin system
• Fewer easing functions available out-of-the-box

Code Comparison

Shifty:

var tween = new Tweenable();
tween.tween({
  from: { x: 0 },
  to: { x: 100 },
  duration: 1000,
  easing: 'easeInOutQuad',
  step: function (state) {
    console.log(state.x);
  }
});

tween.js:

var tween = new TWEEN.Tween({ x: 0 })
  .to({ x: 100 }, 1000)
  .easing(TWEEN.Easing.Quadratic.InOut)
  .onUpdate(function(object) {
    console.log(object.x);
  })
  .start();

Both libraries offer similar functionality for creating and managing tweens, with slight differences in syntax and API design. Shifty uses a more object-oriented approach, while tween.js employs a chaining method pattern. The choice between the two often depends on specific project requirements and personal preference.

Pros of TweenJS

• Part of the larger CreateJS suite, offering integration with other libraries
• Extensive documentation and examples available
• Supports complex animation sequences and timelines

Cons of TweenJS

• Larger file size and potentially more overhead
• Less focused on performance optimization compared to Shifty
• May have a steeper learning curve for beginners

Code Comparison

Shifty:

const tween = new Tweenable();
tween.tween({
  from: { x: 0 },
  to: { x: 100 },
  duration: 1000,
  easing: 'easeInOutQuad',
  step: state => console.log(state.x)
});

TweenJS:

createjs.Tween.get(target)
  .to({ x: 100 }, 1000, createjs.Ease.quadInOut)
  .addEventListener("change", handleChange);

function handleChange(event) {
  console.log(target.x);
}

Both libraries provide similar functionality for creating tweens, but TweenJS uses a more object-oriented approach with its Tween.get() method and event listeners. Shifty's API is more functional and focuses on creating and managing individual tween instances. TweenJS offers more built-in features for complex animations, while Shifty prioritizes a lightweight and performant core with extensibility options.

Pros of mojs

• More comprehensive animation toolkit with a wider range of features
• Supports complex shape animations and custom effects
• Provides a visual timeline editor for easier animation creation

Cons of mojs

• Steeper learning curve due to its extensive feature set
• Larger file size, which may impact page load times
• Less focused on pure tweening, as it covers a broader range of animation types

Code Comparison

mojs:

const burst = new mojs.Burst({
  radius:   { 0: 100 },
  count:    5,
  children: {
    shape:      'circle',
    fill:       { 'cyan' : 'yellow' },
    duration:   2000
  }
});

Shifty:

const tween = new Tweenable();
tween.tween({
  from: { x: 0, y: 0 },
  to: { x: 100, y: 100 },
  duration: 1000,
  easing: 'easeInOutQuad'
});

Summary

mojs is a more feature-rich animation library that offers complex shape animations and a visual editor, making it suitable for advanced animation projects. However, it comes with a steeper learning curve and larger file size. Shifty, on the other hand, focuses primarily on tweening and provides a simpler API for basic animations, making it more lightweight and easier to use for straightforward tweening tasks.