avue

Pros of vue-element-admin

• More comprehensive and feature-rich, offering a complete admin panel solution
• Extensive documentation and community support
• Includes advanced features like permission control and i18n out of the box

Cons of vue-element-admin

• Steeper learning curve due to its complexity
• May be overkill for smaller projects or simpler admin interfaces
• Potentially more challenging to customize extensively

Code Comparison

vue-element-admin:

import permission from './permission'

Vue.use(permission)

// In a component
export default {
  permission: {
    role: ['admin', 'editor']
  }
}

avue:

import Avue from '@smallwei/avue'

Vue.use(Avue)

// In a component
export default {
  data() {
    return {
      option: {
        column: [
          { label: 'Name', prop: 'name' }
        ]
      }
    }
  }
}

vue-element-admin provides a more structured approach to permission management, while avue focuses on simplifying form and table creation with a declarative syntax. vue-element-admin is better suited for large-scale applications with complex requirements, whereas avue excels in rapid development of simpler admin interfaces with its low-code approach.

Pros of iview-admin

• More comprehensive and feature-rich admin template
• Better documentation and community support
• Includes advanced components like charts and tables

Cons of iview-admin

• Steeper learning curve due to complexity
• Less flexibility for customization
• Larger bundle size, potentially impacting performance

Code Comparison

iview-admin:

<template>
  <div>
    <Table :columns="columns" :data="data"></Table>
    <Page :total="100" show-elevator />
  </div>
</template>

avue:

<template>
  <div>
    <avue-crud :option="option" :data="data"></avue-crud>
  </div>
</template>

Key Differences

• iview-admin uses separate components for tables and pagination, while avue combines them into a single avue-crud component
• avue's approach is more concise and requires less boilerplate code
• iview-admin offers more granular control over individual components
• avue's configuration-driven approach may be easier for rapid development

Conclusion

iview-admin is a more comprehensive solution with a wider range of features, making it suitable for complex admin interfaces. avue, on the other hand, offers a simpler and more flexible approach, which may be preferable for projects requiring quick development or extensive customization. The choice between the two depends on the specific needs of the project and the development team's preferences.

Pros of ant-design-vue-pro

• More comprehensive and feature-rich UI components based on Ant Design
• Better documentation and community support
• Stronger focus on enterprise-level applications

Cons of ant-design-vue-pro

• Steeper learning curve due to its complexity
• Larger bundle size, which may impact initial load times
• Less flexibility for customization compared to Avue

Code Comparison

ant-design-vue-pro:

<template>
  <a-form :form="form" @submit="handleSubmit">
    <a-form-item label="Username">
      <a-input v-decorator="['username', { rules: [{ required: true }] }]" />
    </a-form-item>
    <a-form-item>
      <a-button type="primary" html-type="submit">Submit</a-button>
    </a-form-item>
  </a-form>
</template>

Avue:

<template>
  <avue-form :option="option" v-model="form" @submit="handleSubmit">
    <template slot="username">
      <el-input v-model="form.username"></el-input>
    </template>
  </avue-form>
</template>

The code comparison shows that ant-design-vue-pro uses Ant Design components directly, while Avue provides a more abstracted approach with its own form component and options configuration. This demonstrates the difference in flexibility and ease of use between the two libraries.

Pros of uni-app

• Supports multiple platforms (iOS, Android, Web, etc.) with a single codebase
• Large and active community with extensive documentation and resources
• Integrates well with Vue.js, leveraging its ecosystem and familiarity

Cons of uni-app

• Steeper learning curve due to its cross-platform nature and custom syntax
• May have performance limitations compared to native development
• Some platform-specific features might require additional workarounds

Code Comparison

uni-app:

<template>
  <view class="content">
    <text>{{ title }}</text>
    <button @click="changeTitle">Change Title</button>
  </view>
</template>

<script>
export default {
  data() {
    return {
      title: 'Hello'
    }
  },
  methods: {
    changeTitle() {
      this.title = 'New Title'
    }
  }
}
</script>

Avue:

<template>
  <avue-crud :option="option" :data="data"></avue-crud>
</template>

<script>
export default {
  data() {
    return {
      option: {
        column: [
          { label: 'Name', prop: 'name' },
          { label: 'Age', prop: 'age' }
        ]
      },
      data: [
        { name: 'John', age: 30 },
        { name: 'Jane', age: 25 }
      ]
    }
  }
}
</script>

This comparison highlights the different focus areas of uni-app (cross-platform development) and Avue (rapid CRUD interface creation). uni-app offers more flexibility for various app types, while Avue specializes in admin panel development.

Pros of Element

• Larger community and more widespread adoption, leading to better support and resources
• More comprehensive component library with a wider range of UI elements
• Better documentation and examples for developers

Cons of Element

• Heavier package size, which may impact performance for smaller projects
• Less flexibility in customization compared to Avue's low-code approach
• Steeper learning curve for beginners due to its extensive feature set

Code Comparison

Element:

<el-form :model="form" :rules="rules" ref="form">
  <el-form-item label="Name" prop="name">
    <el-input v-model="form.name"></el-input>
  </el-form-item>
  <el-form-item>
    <el-button type="primary" @click="submitForm">Submit</el-button>
  </el-form-item>
</el-form>

Avue:

<avue-form :option="option" v-model="form" @submit="handleSubmit">
  <template slot="menuForm">
    <el-button type="primary" @click="handleSubmit">Submit</el-button>
  </template>
</avue-form>

Summary

Element offers a more comprehensive UI library with better community support, while Avue provides a low-code approach with greater flexibility for rapid development. Element may be better suited for larger projects requiring a wide range of components, whereas Avue could be more efficient for smaller projects or those requiring quick prototyping.

Pros of Vuetify

• Larger community and more extensive documentation
• Wider range of pre-built components and features
• Better support for internationalization and accessibility

Cons of Vuetify

• Steeper learning curve due to its extensive feature set
• Larger bundle size, which may impact performance
• Less flexibility in customizing the overall design system

Code Comparison

Vuetify component usage:

<template>
  <v-app>
    <v-btn color="primary">Click me</v-btn>
  </v-app>
</template>

Avue component usage:

<template>
  <avue-crud :option="option" :data="data"></avue-crud>
</template>

Summary

Vuetify is a more comprehensive UI framework with a larger ecosystem, offering a wide range of components and features. It's well-suited for large-scale applications requiring extensive UI elements and internationalization support. However, this comes at the cost of a steeper learning curve and larger bundle size.

Avue, on the other hand, focuses more on rapid development and simplicity, particularly for admin interfaces and data-driven applications. It offers a more streamlined approach but may have fewer pre-built components compared to Vuetify.

The choice between the two depends on project requirements, team expertise, and the desired balance between feature richness and simplicity.