sketch.js

Pros of p5.js

• Larger community and more extensive documentation
• Wider range of features and libraries for creative coding
• Better integration with web technologies and modern JavaScript

Cons of p5.js

• Larger file size and potentially slower performance
• Steeper learning curve for beginners
• Less focused on simplicity and minimalism

Code Comparison

p5.js:

function setup() {
  createCanvas(400, 400);
}

function draw() {
  ellipse(50, 50, 80, 80);
}

sketch.js:

Sketch.create({
  setup: function() {
    this.fillStyle = '#333';
  },
  draw: function() {
    this.fillEllipse(50, 50, 80, 80);
  }
});

Both libraries aim to simplify creative coding, but p5.js offers a more comprehensive set of tools and features, while sketch.js focuses on a lightweight and minimalistic approach. p5.js is better suited for complex projects and those requiring extensive functionality, whereas sketch.js may be preferable for simpler sketches and performance-critical applications.

Pros of Paper.js

• More comprehensive and feature-rich library for vector graphics
• Robust documentation and extensive API
• Active development and community support

Cons of Paper.js

• Steeper learning curve due to its complexity
• Larger file size, which may impact load times
• May be overkill for simpler projects

Code Comparison

Paper.js:

paper.install(window);
window.onload = function() {
    paper.setup('myCanvas');
    var path = new Path.Circle({
        center: view.center,
        radius: 30,
        strokeColor: 'black'
    });
}

Sketch.js:

Sketch.create({
    setup() {
        // Setup code here
    },
    draw() {
        this.fillCircle(this.width / 2, this.height / 2, 30);
    }
});

Paper.js offers a more object-oriented approach with detailed control over shapes and properties, while Sketch.js provides a simpler, more straightforward API for quick sketches and animations. Paper.js is better suited for complex vector graphics projects, whereas Sketch.js excels in rapid prototyping and simple interactive visualizations.

Pros of Fabric.js

• More comprehensive and feature-rich library for canvas manipulation
• Better suited for complex interactive applications and image editing
• Extensive documentation and active community support

Cons of Fabric.js

• Larger file size and potentially heavier performance impact
• Steeper learning curve due to its extensive API

Code Comparison

Sketch.js:

Sketch.create({
  setup() {
    // Setup code
  },
  draw() {
    // Drawing code
  }
});

Fabric.js:

var canvas = new fabric.Canvas('canvas');
var rect = new fabric.Rect({
  left: 100,
  top: 100,
  fill: 'red',
  width: 20,
  height: 20
});
canvas.add(rect);

Summary

Sketch.js is a lightweight, simple library for creative coding, while Fabric.js is a more powerful and versatile library for complex canvas manipulations. Sketch.js is easier to get started with but has limited features compared to Fabric.js. Fabric.js offers more advanced capabilities but comes with a larger file size and steeper learning curve. The choice between the two depends on the specific requirements of your project and the level of complexity you need in canvas manipulation.

Pros of PixiJS

• More comprehensive and feature-rich, offering advanced rendering capabilities
• Larger community and ecosystem, with better documentation and support
• Better performance for complex graphics and animations

Cons of PixiJS

• Steeper learning curve due to its more extensive API
• Larger file size, which may impact load times for smaller projects
• Potentially overkill for simple 2D graphics or basic animations

Code Comparison

PixiJS:

const app = new PIXI.Application();
document.body.appendChild(app.view);
const sprite = PIXI.Sprite.from('image.png');
app.stage.addChild(sprite);
app.ticker.add(() => sprite.rotation += 0.01);

Sketch.js:

Sketch.create({
  setup() {
    this.x = this.width / 2;
    this.y = this.height / 2;
  },
  draw() {
    this.fillCircle(this.x, this.y, 50);
  }
});

Summary

PixiJS is a more powerful and feature-rich library, suitable for complex graphics and game development. It offers better performance and a larger ecosystem but comes with a steeper learning curve and larger file size. Sketch.js, on the other hand, is simpler and more lightweight, making it ideal for quick prototypes and basic animations. The choice between the two depends on the project's complexity and requirements.

Pros of EaselJS

• More comprehensive and feature-rich, offering a full suite of tools for canvas manipulation
• Better documentation and community support due to being part of the larger CreateJS ecosystem
• Optimized for performance, especially when handling complex animations and large numbers of objects

Cons of EaselJS

• Steeper learning curve due to its more extensive API and features
• Larger file size, which may impact load times for smaller projects
• More opinionated structure, potentially limiting flexibility for certain use cases

Code Comparison

EaselJS:

var stage = new createjs.Stage("canvas");
var circle = new createjs.Shape();
circle.graphics.beginFill("red").drawCircle(0, 0, 50);
circle.x = 100;
circle.y = 100;
stage.addChild(circle);

sketch.js:

Sketch.create({
  setup() {
    this.r = 50;
  },
  draw() {
    this.fillStyle = 'red';
    this.beginPath();
    this.arc(100, 100, this.r, 0, TWO_PI);
    this.fill();
  }
});

Both libraries provide ways to create and manipulate canvas elements, but EaselJS offers a more object-oriented approach with its display list hierarchy, while sketch.js focuses on simplicity and ease of use for quick prototyping and experimentation.

Pros of three.js

• More comprehensive 3D rendering capabilities
• Larger community and ecosystem
• Extensive documentation and examples

Cons of three.js

• Steeper learning curve
• Larger file size and potentially higher performance overhead

Code Comparison

three.js:

const scene = new THREE.Scene();
const camera = new THREE.PerspectiveCamera(75, window.innerWidth / window.innerHeight, 0.1, 1000);
const renderer = new THREE.WebGLRenderer();
renderer.setSize(window.innerWidth, window.innerHeight);
document.body.appendChild(renderer.domElement);

sketch.js:

Sketch.create({
  setup() {
    // Initialize your sketch
  },
  draw() {
    // Draw your sketch
  }
});

Summary

three.js is a powerful 3D graphics library with extensive features and community support, making it ideal for complex 3D projects. However, it comes with a steeper learning curve and larger file size.

sketch.js, on the other hand, is a lightweight 2D drawing library that's easier to get started with but has more limited capabilities compared to three.js.

The choice between the two depends on the project requirements, with three.js being better suited for 3D graphics and complex visualizations, while sketch.js is more appropriate for simpler 2D sketches and animations.