Convert Figma logo to code with AI

solidjs logosolid-start

SolidStart, the Solid app framework

5,038
376
5,038
69

Top Related Projects

29,083

Build Better Websites. Create modern, resilient user experiences with web fundamentals.

124,777

The React Framework

18,419

web development, streamlined

54,014

The Intuitive Vue Framework.

45,414

The web framework for content-driven websites. ⭐️ Star to support our work!

17,089

The App Framework for Startups

Quick Overview

Solid Start is a meta-framework for SolidJS, designed to simplify the process of building server-side rendered (SSR) and static site generation (SSG) applications. It provides a seamless integration of SolidJS with server-side technologies, offering a full-stack solution for web development.

Pros

  • Seamless integration of SolidJS with server-side rendering and static site generation
  • Built-in routing system with file-based routing
  • Supports multiple deployment targets (Node.js, Deno, Cloudflare Workers, etc.)
  • Easy to use API routes for backend functionality

Cons

  • Relatively new project, still in beta phase
  • Smaller community and ecosystem compared to more established frameworks
  • Limited documentation and learning resources
  • May have breaking changes as it evolves towards a stable release

Code Examples

  1. Basic page component:
// src/routes/index.tsx
export default function Home() {
  return (
    <main>
      <h1>Welcome to Solid Start</h1>
      <p>Hello, world!</p>
    </main>
  );
}
  1. API route example:
// src/routes/api/hello.ts
import { APIEvent } from "solid-start";

export function GET({ request }: APIEvent) {
  return new Response("Hello from the API!");
}
  1. Data fetching with resource:
// src/routes/users.tsx
import { createResource, For } from "solid-js";
import { useRouteData } from "solid-start";

export function routeData() {
  const [users] = createResource(() => 
    fetch("https://jsonplaceholder.typicode.com/users").then(res => res.json())
  );
  return { users };
}

export default function Users() {
  const { users } = useRouteData<typeof routeData>();
  return (
    <ul>
      <For each={users()}>{user => <li>{user.name}</li>}</For>
    </ul>
  );
}

Getting Started

To start a new Solid Start project:

# Create a new project
npx degit solidjs/solid-start my-solid-app
cd my-solid-app

# Install dependencies
npm install

# Start the development server
npm run dev

This will create a new Solid Start project and start the development server. You can now open your browser and navigate to http://localhost:3000 to see your application running.

Competitor Comparisons

29,083

Build Better Websites. Create modern, resilient user experiences with web fundamentals.

Pros of Remix

  • More mature and established framework with a larger community and ecosystem
  • Built-in support for server-side rendering and data loading
  • Comprehensive documentation and extensive learning resources

Cons of Remix

  • Steeper learning curve due to its full-stack nature
  • Requires more boilerplate code for simple applications
  • Less flexible routing system compared to Solid Start's file-based routing

Code Comparison

Remix route example:

export default function Index() {
  return <h1>Hello, Remix!</h1>;
}

export function loader() {
  return { message: "Welcome to Remix" };
}

Solid Start route example:

export default function Index() {
  return <h1>Hello, Solid Start!</h1>;
}

export function routeData() {
  return { message: "Welcome to Solid Start" };
}

Both frameworks use a similar approach for defining routes and data loading, but Remix uses the loader function while Solid Start uses routeData. Solid Start's syntax is generally more concise and closer to standard JavaScript, while Remix introduces more framework-specific concepts.

Remix offers a more opinionated structure for building full-stack applications, while Solid Start provides a lighter-weight approach that may be more suitable for smaller projects or developers who prefer more flexibility in their tooling choices.

124,777

The React Framework

Pros of Next.js

  • Larger ecosystem and community support
  • More mature and battle-tested in production environments
  • Extensive documentation and learning resources

Cons of Next.js

  • Heavier bundle size and potentially slower performance
  • More complex setup and configuration
  • Steeper learning curve for beginners

Code Comparison

Next.js:

import { useEffect, useState } from 'react'

function HomePage() {
  const [data, setData] = useState(null)
  useEffect(() => {
    fetch('/api/data').then(res => res.json()).then(setData)
  }, [])
  return <div>{data ? data.message : 'Loading...'}</div>
}

Solid Start:

import { createResource } from 'solid-js'

function HomePage() {
  const [data] = createResource(() => fetch('/api/data').then(res => res.json()))
  return <div>{data() ? data().message : 'Loading...'}</div>
}

The code comparison shows that Solid Start offers a more concise and reactive approach to data fetching and rendering, while Next.js relies on React hooks for similar functionality. Solid Start's fine-grained reactivity system allows for more efficient updates and potentially better performance in complex applications.

18,419

web development, streamlined

Pros of Kit

  • More mature and stable ecosystem with a larger community
  • Comprehensive documentation and extensive learning resources
  • Built-in support for server-side rendering (SSR) and static site generation (SSG)

Cons of Kit

  • Steeper learning curve due to Svelte-specific syntax and concepts
  • Less flexible routing system compared to Solid Start's file-based routing
  • Potentially larger bundle sizes for complex applications

Code Comparison

Kit (Svelte):

<script>
  export let name;
</script>

<h1>Hello {name}!</h1>

Solid Start:

import { createSignal } from "solid-js";

export default function Hello(props) {
  const [name, setName] = createSignal(props.name);
  return <h1>Hello {name()}!</h1>;
}

Key Differences

  • Syntax: Kit uses Svelte's template-based approach, while Solid Start uses JSX
  • Reactivity: Kit relies on Svelte's compiler for reactivity, Solid Start uses fine-grained reactivity with signals
  • Routing: Kit uses a configuration-based routing system, Solid Start employs file-based routing
  • Performance: Solid Start generally offers better runtime performance, especially for larger applications
  • Learning Curve: Kit may be easier for developers familiar with traditional frameworks, while Solid Start's approach might be more intuitive for those with React experience

Both frameworks offer excellent developer experiences and are suitable for building modern web applications, with the choice depending on specific project requirements and team preferences.

54,014

The Intuitive Vue Framework.

Pros of Nuxt

  • Mature ecosystem with extensive documentation and community support
  • Built-in features like automatic code splitting and server-side rendering
  • Seamless integration with Vue.js and its ecosystem

Cons of Nuxt

  • Steeper learning curve for developers new to Vue.js
  • Potentially larger bundle size due to included features
  • Less flexibility in choosing rendering strategies compared to Solid Start

Code Comparison

Nuxt (Vue.js):

<template>
  <div>
    <h1>{{ title }}</h1>
    <button @click="increment">Count: {{ count }}</button>
  </div>
</template>

<script>
export default {
  data() {
    return { count: 0, title: 'Nuxt App' }
  },
  methods: {
    increment() {
      this.count++
    }
  }
}
</script>

Solid Start:

import { createSignal } from 'solid-js';

export default function App() {
  const [count, setCount] = createSignal(0);
  return (
    <div>
      <h1>Solid Start App</h1>
      <button onClick={() => setCount(count() + 1)}>Count: {count()}</button>
    </div>
  );
}

Solid Start offers a more concise and reactive approach, while Nuxt provides a familiar Vue.js structure with additional built-in features. The choice between the two depends on project requirements, team expertise, and desired performance characteristics.

45,414

The web framework for content-driven websites. ⭐️ Star to support our work!

Pros of Astro

  • Supports multiple frontend frameworks (React, Vue, Svelte, etc.) in a single project
  • Excellent static site generation capabilities with partial hydration
  • Large and active community with extensive ecosystem of integrations

Cons of Astro

  • Steeper learning curve due to its unique approach and syntax
  • Less suitable for highly dynamic, client-side heavy applications
  • Performance may suffer when using multiple frameworks in a single project

Code Comparison

Astro component:

---
const { title } = Astro.props;
---
<h1>{title}</h1>
<slot />

Solid Start component:

import { createSignal } from "solid-js";

export default function Component(props) {
  const [count, setCount] = createSignal(0);
  return <h1>{props.title}</h1>;
}

Astro focuses on static site generation with optional interactivity, while Solid Start is built for full-stack applications with a reactive approach. Astro's syntax separates frontmatter and markup, whereas Solid Start uses JSX with signals for reactivity. Both frameworks aim to provide excellent performance, but Astro excels in static content delivery, while Solid Start shines in dynamic, interactive applications.

17,089

The App Framework for Startups

Pros of Redwood

  • Full-stack framework with integrated backend and frontend
  • Built-in authentication and authorization
  • Opinionated structure for faster development and easier onboarding

Cons of Redwood

  • Steeper learning curve due to its comprehensive nature
  • Less flexibility in choosing backend technologies
  • Potentially overkill for smaller projects

Code Comparison

Redwood route definition:

<Route path="/" page={HomePage} name="home" />
<Route path="/about" page={AboutPage} name="about" />

Solid Start route definition:

<Route path="/" component={Home} />
<Route path="/about" component={About} />

Both frameworks use a similar syntax for defining routes, but Redwood includes additional properties like name for easier reference.

Redwood offers a more comprehensive solution with integrated backend and frontend, making it suitable for larger projects. Solid Start, being more focused on the frontend, provides greater flexibility and a potentially gentler learning curve for developers already familiar with SolidJS.

The choice between the two depends on project requirements, team expertise, and desired level of structure and integration.

Convert Figma logo designs to code with AI

Visual Copilot

Introducing Visual Copilot: A new AI model to turn Figma designs to high quality code using your components.

Try Visual Copilot

README

Solid Docs

SolidStart

This is the home of the SolidStart, the Solid app framework.

Features

  • File-system based routing
  • Supports all rendering modes:
    • Server-side rendering (SSR)
    • Streaming SSR
    • Client-side rendering (CSR)
    • Static site generation (SSG)
  • Streaming
  • Build optimizations with code splitting, tree shaking and dead code elimination
  • API Routes
  • Built on Web standards like Fetch, Streams, and WebCrypto
  • Adapters for deployment to all popular platforms
  • CSS Modules, SASS/SCSS Support
  • TypeScript-first

Getting started

Create a SolidStart application and run a development server using your preferred package manager:

mkdir my-app
cd my-app

# with npm
npm init solid@latest
npm install
npm run dev

# or with pnpm
pnpm create solid@latest
pnpm install
pnpm dev

# or with Bun
bun create solid@latest
bun install
bun dev

Development

You should use a Node.js version manager compatible with .node-version (asdf-vm is a great option macOS/Linux users)

The monorepo uses pnpm as the package manager. To install pnpm, run the following command in your terminal.

npm install -g pnpm

Run pnpm install to install all the dependencies for the packages and examples in your monorepo.

Run pnpm build to build SolidStart project

Monorepo & project.json "workspace" support

If you are using SolidStart within a monorepo that takes advantage of the package.json "workspaces" property (e.g. Yarn workspaces) with hoisted dependencies (the default for Yarn), you must include #solidjs/start within the optional "nohoist" (for Yarn v2 or higher, see further down for instructions) workspaces property.

  • In the following, "workspace root" refers to the root of your repository while "project root" refers to the root of a child package within your repository.

For example, if specifying "nohoist" options from the workspace root (i.e. for all packages):

// in workspace root
{
  "workspaces": {
    "packages": [
      /* ... */
    ],
    "nohoist": ["**/@solidjs/start"]
  }
}

If specifying "nohoist" options for a specific package using @solidjs/start:

// in project root of a workspace child
{
  "workspaces": {
    "nohoist": ["@solidjs/start"]
  }
}

Regardless of where you specify the nohoist option, you also need to include @solidjs/start as a devDependency in the child package.json.

The reason why this is necessary is because @solidjs/start creates an index.html file within your project which expects to load a script located in /node_modules/@solidjs/start/runtime/entry.jsx (where / is the path of your project root). By default, if you hoist the @solidjs/start dependency into the workspace root then that script will not be available within the package's node_modules folder.

Yarn v2 or higher

The nohoist option is no longer available in Yarn v2+. In this case, we can use the installConfig property in the package.json (either workspace package or a specific project package) to make sure our deps are not hoisted.

// in project root of a workspace child
{
  "installConfig": {
    "hoistingLimits": "dependencies"
  }
}

NPM DownloadsLast 30 Days