storybook

Pros of Docusaurus

• Easier to set up and configure for documentation-focused projects
• Built-in search functionality and internationalization support
• Better suited for creating full documentation websites with multiple pages

Cons of Docusaurus

• Less flexible for showcasing UI components and design systems
• Limited customization options compared to Storybook's extensive addon ecosystem
• Primarily focused on documentation, lacking advanced component development features

Code Comparison

Docusaurus configuration (docusaurus.config.js):

module.exports = {
  title: 'My Project',
  tagline: 'A website for my project',
  url: 'https://myproject.com',
  baseUrl: '/',
  onBrokenLinks: 'throw',
  favicon: 'img/favicon.ico',
  organizationName: 'myorg',
  projectName: 'myproject',
};

Storybook configuration (.storybook/main.js):

module.exports = {
  stories: ['../src/**/*.stories.mdx', '../src/**/*.stories.@(js|jsx|ts|tsx)'],
  addons: ['@storybook/addon-links', '@storybook/addon-essentials'],
  framework: '@storybook/react',
};

Both tools serve different purposes: Docusaurus excels at creating documentation websites, while Storybook is better suited for developing and showcasing UI components. Choose based on your project's primary focus and requirements.

Pros of React Styleguidist

• Simpler setup and configuration process
• Better support for documenting React components with Markdown
• Automatic prop type documentation generation

Cons of React Styleguidist

• Less extensive ecosystem and addon support
• Limited support for non-React frameworks
• Fewer built-in features for testing and accessibility checks

Code Comparison

React Styleguidist:

import React from 'react';
import Button from './Button';

export default function ButtonExample() {
  return <Button>Click me</Button>;
}

Storybook:

import React from 'react';
import { Button } from './Button';

export default {
  title: 'Example/Button',
  component: Button,
};

const Template = (args) => <Button {...args} />;
export const Primary = Template.bind({});
Primary.args = {
  children: 'Click me',
};

React Styleguidist focuses on creating a styleguide with examples and documentation, while Storybook provides a more structured approach to component development and testing. Styleguidist's setup is generally simpler, but Storybook offers more advanced features and broader framework support. The code examples show how Styleguidist uses standard React components for examples, while Storybook employs a specific story format with additional configuration options.

Pros of Docz

• Simpler setup and configuration process
• Built-in support for MDX, allowing easy mixing of documentation and live code examples
• Lightweight and faster build times for smaller projects

Cons of Docz

• Less extensive ecosystem and plugin support
• Fewer built-in features and customization options
• Limited theming capabilities compared to Storybook's robust theming system

Code Comparison

Docz configuration:

// doczrc.js
export default {
  title: 'My Component Library',
  description: 'Documentation for my React components',
  base: '/docs',
}

Storybook configuration:

// .storybook/main.js
module.exports = {
  stories: ['../src/**/*.stories.@(js|jsx|ts|tsx)'],
  addons: ['@storybook/addon-links', '@storybook/addon-essentials'],
};

Both Storybook and Docz are popular tools for documenting and showcasing components, but they cater to different needs. Storybook offers a more comprehensive solution with extensive features and a large ecosystem, making it suitable for complex projects and teams. Docz, on the other hand, provides a simpler, more lightweight approach that can be beneficial for smaller projects or those primarily focused on documentation with code examples.

Pros of React Cosmos

• Lightweight and faster to set up compared to Storybook
• Better integration with React's context API and hooks
• More flexible fixture system for component testing

Cons of React Cosmos

• Smaller community and ecosystem than Storybook
• Less extensive documentation and fewer learning resources
• Fewer built-in addons and integrations

Code Comparison

React Cosmos:

// cosmos.decorator.js
import { Decorator } from 'react-cosmos/react';

export default ({ children }) => (
  <ThemeProvider theme={lightTheme}>{children}</ThemeProvider>
);

Storybook:

// preview.js
import { ThemeProvider } from 'styled-components';
import { lightTheme } from './themes';

export const decorators = [
  (Story) => (
    <ThemeProvider theme={lightTheme}>
      <Story />
    </ThemeProvider>
  ),
];

Both React Cosmos and Storybook are powerful tools for developing and testing UI components in isolation. React Cosmos offers a more lightweight and flexible approach, particularly well-suited for React-specific projects. It excels in working with React's context and hooks, and provides a versatile fixture system.

Storybook, on the other hand, boasts a larger community, more extensive documentation, and a wider range of addons and integrations. It's generally considered more feature-rich and has better support for various frameworks beyond React.

The code comparison shows how both tools allow for similar functionality in terms of applying global decorators or wrappers to components, with slight differences in syntax and configuration.