Pros of jstree

• More extensive documentation and examples
• Larger community and more frequent updates
• Better support for drag-and-drop functionality

Cons of jstree

• Slightly steeper learning curve for beginners
• Less flexible theming options out of the box
• Heavier file size compared to Fancytree

Code Comparison

jstree:

$('#tree').jstree({
  'core' : {
    'data' : [
      { "id" : "1", "parent" : "#", "text" : "Node 1" },
      { "id" : "2", "parent" : "1", "text" : "Child 1" }
    ]
  }
});

Fancytree:

$("#tree").fancytree({
  source: [
    {title: "Node 1", key: "1", 
      children: [{title: "Child 1", key: "2"}]
    }
  ]
});

Both libraries offer similar functionality for creating tree structures, but jstree uses a more nested approach for defining child nodes, while Fancytree uses a flatter structure with a dedicated "children" property. jstree also explicitly defines the parent-child relationship using "parent" keys, whereas Fancytree infers this relationship from the structure of the data array.

Pros of bootstrap-treeview

• Lightweight and simple to use, with minimal setup required
• Seamless integration with Bootstrap, making it ideal for Bootstrap-based projects
• Built-in search functionality for easy node filtering

Cons of bootstrap-treeview

• Limited customization options compared to fancytree's extensive feature set
• Less active development and community support
• Fewer advanced features like drag-and-drop, lazy loading, or keyboard navigation

Code Comparison

bootstrap-treeview:

$('#tree').treeview({
  data: treeData,
  levels: 2,
  expandIcon: 'glyphicon glyphicon-plus',
  collapseIcon: 'glyphicon glyphicon-minus',
  showTags: true
});

fancytree:

$("#tree").fancytree({
  source: treeData,
  extensions: ["filter", "edit"],
  filter: {
    mode: "hide"
  },
  edit: {
    triggerStart: ["f2", "dblclick", "shift+click", "mac+enter"]
  }
});

The code comparison demonstrates that bootstrap-treeview has a simpler initialization process, while fancytree offers more advanced configuration options and extensions. fancytree's code shows built-in support for filtering and editing, which are not available in the basic bootstrap-treeview setup.

Pros of zTree

• More extensive documentation and examples
• Supports a wider range of customization options
• Larger community and longer development history

Cons of zTree

• Less frequent updates and maintenance
• Heavier file size and potentially slower performance
• More complex API, which may have a steeper learning curve

Code Comparison

zTree

var setting = {
    data: {
        simpleData: {
            enable: true
        }
    }
};
var zNodes = [
    { id:1, pId:0, name:"Parent Node 1" },
    { id:11, pId:1, name:"Child Node 1" },
    { id:12, pId:1, name:"Child Node 2" }
];
$.fn.zTree.init($("#treeDemo"), setting, zNodes);

Fancytree

$("#tree").fancytree({
  source: [
    {title: "Parent Node 1", key: "1", children: [
      {title: "Child Node 1", key: "11"},
      {title: "Child Node 2", key: "12"}
    ]}
  ]
});

Both libraries offer similar functionality for creating tree structures, but zTree provides more detailed configuration options, while Fancytree offers a simpler API. zTree uses a flat array structure with parent-child relationships defined by IDs, whereas Fancytree uses a nested object structure. The initialization process is also slightly different, with zTree requiring separate setting and node data objects.