Pros of react-virtualized

• More comprehensive set of components for virtualized rendering
• Better performance for large datasets and dynamic content
• More active development and community support

Cons of react-virtualized

• Steeper learning curve due to more complex API
• Less focus on fixed-layout tables compared to fixed-data-table-2

Code Comparison

react-virtualized:

import { List } from 'react-virtualized';

<List
  width={300}
  height={300}
  rowCount={1000}
  rowHeight={20}
  rowRenderer={({ index, key, style }) => (
    <div key={key} style={style}>
      Row {index}
    </div>
  )}
/>

fixed-data-table-2:

import { Table, Column, Cell } from 'fixed-data-table-2';

<Table
  rowHeight={50}
  rowsCount={1000}
  width={300}
  height={300}
  headerHeight={50}
>
  <Column
    header={<Cell>Col 1</Cell>}
    cell={({rowIndex, ...props}) => (
      <Cell {...props}>Data for row {rowIndex}</Cell>
    )}
    width={200}
  />
</Table>

Both libraries offer virtualized rendering for large datasets, but react-virtualized provides a more flexible API for various use cases beyond tables. fixed-data-table-2 focuses specifically on table layouts with fixed headers and columns. The choice between them depends on the specific requirements of your project and the complexity of the data presentation needed.

Pros of TanStack Table

• More flexible and customizable, supporting various UI frameworks
• Better performance for large datasets with virtualization
• Active development and community support

Cons of TanStack Table

• Steeper learning curve due to its headless nature
• Requires more setup and configuration for basic use cases

Code Comparison

Fixed-Data-Table-2:

import { Table, Column, Cell } from 'fixed-data-table-2';

<Table
  rowHeight={50}
  rowsCount={rows.length}
  width={1000}
  height={500}
  headerHeight={50}>
  <Column
    header={<Cell>Col 1</Cell>}
    cell={({rowIndex, ...props}) => (
      <Cell {...props}>
        {rows[rowIndex][0]}
      </Cell>
    )}
    width={200}
  />
</Table>

TanStack Table:

import { useTable } from '@tanstack/react-table';

const { getTableProps, getTableBodyProps, headerGroups, rows, prepareRow } = useTable({
  columns,
  data,
});

return (
  <table {...getTableProps()}>
    <thead>
      {headerGroups.map(headerGroup => (
        <tr {...headerGroup.getHeaderGroupProps()}>
          {headerGroup.headers.map(column => (
            <th {...column.getHeaderProps()}>{column.render('Header')}</th>
          ))}
        </tr>
      ))}
    </thead>
    <tbody {...getTableBodyProps()}>
      {rows.map(row => {
        prepareRow(row);
        return (
          <tr {...row.getRowProps()}>
            {row.cells.map(cell => (
              <td {...cell.getCellProps()}>{cell.render('Cell')}</td>
            ))}
          </tr>
        );
      })}
    </tbody>
  </table>
);

Pros of react-data-grid

• More active development and frequent updates
• Better TypeScript support and type definitions
• Easier to customize and extend with plugins

Cons of react-data-grid

• Less performant with large datasets
• Limited built-in features compared to fixed-data-table-2
• Steeper learning curve for advanced functionality

Code Comparison

react-data-grid:

import ReactDataGrid from 'react-data-grid';

const columns = [
  { key: 'id', name: 'ID' },
  { key: 'title', name: 'Title' }
];

const rows = [
  { id: 1, title: 'Example 1' },
  { id: 2, title: 'Example 2' }
];

function MyGrid() {
  return <ReactDataGrid columns={columns} rows={rows} />;
}

fixed-data-table-2:

import { Table, Column, Cell } from 'fixed-data-table-2';

function MyTable() {
  return (
    <Table
      rowHeight={50}
      rowsCount={rows.length}
      width={500}
      height={300}
      headerHeight={50}
    >
      <Column
        header={<Cell>ID</Cell>}
        cell={({rowIndex}) => <Cell>{rows[rowIndex].id}</Cell>}
        width={100}
      />
      <Column
        header={<Cell>Title</Cell>}
        cell={({rowIndex}) => <Cell>{rows[rowIndex].title}</Cell>}
        width={400}
      />
    </Table>
  );
}

Pros of TanStack Table

• More flexible and customizable, supporting various UI frameworks
• Better performance for large datasets with virtualization
• Active development and community support

Cons of TanStack Table

• Steeper learning curve due to its headless nature
• Requires more setup and configuration for basic use cases

Code Comparison

Fixed-Data-Table-2:

import { Table, Column, Cell } from 'fixed-data-table-2';

<Table
  rowHeight={50}
  rowsCount={rows.length}
  width={1000}
  height={500}
  headerHeight={50}>
  <Column
    header={<Cell>Col 1</Cell>}
    cell={({rowIndex, ...props}) => (
      <Cell {...props}>
        {rows[rowIndex][0]}
      </Cell>
    )}
    width={200}
  />
</Table>

TanStack Table:

import { useTable } from '@tanstack/react-table';

const { getTableProps, getTableBodyProps, headerGroups, rows, prepareRow } = useTable({
  columns,
  data,
});

return (
  <table {...getTableProps()}>
    <thead>
      {headerGroups.map(headerGroup => (
        <tr {...headerGroup.getHeaderGroupProps()}>
          {headerGroup.headers.map(column => (
            <th {...column.getHeaderProps()}>{column.render('Header')}</th>
          ))}
        </tr>
      ))}
    </thead>
    <tbody {...getTableBodyProps()}>
      {rows.map(row => {
        prepareRow(row);
        return (
          <tr {...row.getRowProps()}>
            {row.cells.map(cell => (
              <td {...cell.getCellProps()}>{cell.render('Cell')}</td>
            ))}
          </tr>
        );
      })}
    </tbody>
  </table>
);

Pros of material-table

• More feature-rich with built-in sorting, filtering, and pagination
• Better integration with Material-UI components and styling
• Easier to set up and use for basic table needs

Cons of material-table

• Less performant for large datasets compared to fixed-data-table-2
• Limited customization options for complex table layouts
• Heavier bundle size due to additional features and dependencies

Code Comparison

material-table:

import MaterialTable from 'material-table'

<MaterialTable
  columns={[
    { title: 'Name', field: 'name' },
    { title: 'Age', field: 'age', type: 'numeric' }
  ]}
  data={[{ name: 'John', age: 30 }, { name: 'Jane', age: 25 }]}
/>

fixed-data-table-2:

import { Table, Column, Cell } from 'fixed-data-table-2'

<Table
  rowHeight={50}
  rowsCount={2}
  width={500}
  height={100}
  headerHeight={50}>
  <Column
    header={<Cell>Name</Cell>}
    cell={({rowIndex}) => (<Cell>{data[rowIndex].name}</Cell>)}
    width={200}
  />
  <Column
    header={<Cell>Age</Cell>}
    cell={({rowIndex}) => (<Cell>{data[rowIndex].age}</Cell>)}
    width={200}
  />
</Table>

material-table offers a more concise and declarative API, while fixed-data-table-2 provides more granular control over table structure and rendering.

Pros of mui-datatables

• Built specifically for Material-UI, offering seamless integration with MUI components
• More extensive built-in features like filtering, sorting, and responsive design
• Active development and frequent updates

Cons of mui-datatables

• Potentially slower performance for large datasets compared to fixed-data-table-2
• Less flexibility for custom styling outside of Material-UI design system

Code Comparison

mui-datatables:

import MUIDataTable from "mui-datatables";

const columns = ["Name", "Company", "City", "State"];
const data = [
  ["Joe James", "Test Corp", "Yonkers", "NY"],
  ["John Walsh", "Test Corp", "Hartford", "CT"],
];

const options = {
  filterType: 'checkbox',
};

<MUIDataTable 
  title={"Employee List"} 
  data={data} 
  columns={columns} 
  options={options} 
/>

fixed-data-table-2:

import {Table, Column, Cell} from 'fixed-data-table-2';

<Table
  rowHeight={50}
  rowsCount={data.length}
  width={1000}
  height={500}
  headerHeight={50}>
  <Column
    header={<Cell>Name</Cell>}
    cell={({rowIndex, ...props}) => (
      <Cell {...props}>
        {data[rowIndex].name}
      </Cell>
    )}
    width={200}
  />
</Table>