react-styleguidist

Pros of Storybook

• Wider ecosystem with more addons and integrations
• Better support for multiple frameworks (React, Vue, Angular, etc.)
• More advanced features like visual testing and accessibility checks

Cons of Storybook

• Steeper learning curve and more complex setup
• Heavier build size and potentially slower performance
• Can be overwhelming for smaller projects or teams

Code Comparison

React Styleguidist:

import Button from './Button';

<Button>Click me</Button>

Storybook:

import { Button } from './Button';

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

export const Primary = () => <Button primary>Button</Button>;

React Styleguidist focuses on a simpler, documentation-first approach with Markdown files, while Storybook uses a more structured, story-based format. Storybook's code structure allows for more advanced configurations and variations of components, but React Styleguidist's approach can be quicker to set up for basic documentation needs.

Both tools serve similar purposes but cater to different project sizes and complexity levels. React Styleguidist is often preferred for smaller projects or when rapid documentation is needed, while Storybook shines in larger, more complex applications with diverse component libraries.

Pros of Docz

• Built on Gatsby, offering better performance and static site generation capabilities
• More flexible theming system with easy customization options
• Supports MDX out of the box, allowing for interactive documentation

Cons of Docz

• Steeper learning curve, especially for developers unfamiliar with Gatsby
• Less mature ecosystem compared to React Styleguidist
• May require more configuration for complex setups

Code Comparison

React Styleguidist:

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

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

Docz:

---
name: Button
---

import { Playground, Props } from 'docz'
import { Button } from './Button'

# Button

<Props of={Button} />

<Playground>
  <Button>Click me</Button>
</Playground>

The main difference in the code examples is that Docz uses a more declarative approach with MDX, combining Markdown and JSX. This allows for a more integrated documentation experience, while React Styleguidist separates the component example from its documentation.

Pros of react-docgen

• Lightweight and focused solely on extracting component information
• Can be easily integrated into custom documentation workflows
• Supports TypeScript out of the box

Cons of react-docgen

• Lacks built-in UI for rendering documentation
• Requires additional setup to generate a complete style guide
• Limited customization options for output format

Code Comparison

react-docgen:

const docgen = require('react-docgen');
const componentInfo = docgen.parse(source);
console.log(componentInfo);

react-styleguidist:

module.exports = {
  components: 'src/components/**/*.js',
  webpackConfig: require('./webpack.config.js')
};

react-docgen focuses on extracting component information programmatically, while react-styleguidist provides a complete solution for generating and displaying a style guide.

react-docgen is better suited for developers who want to build custom documentation tools or integrate component information into existing systems. It offers more flexibility but requires additional work to create a polished documentation site.

react-styleguidist, on the other hand, offers a more comprehensive out-of-the-box solution for creating styleguides and component documentation. It includes a built-in UI, live component previews, and easier configuration, making it ideal for teams looking for a quick and visually appealing documentation setup.

Pros of React Cosmos

• More flexible and customizable, allowing for complex component setups and scenarios
• Better suited for testing and debugging components in isolation
• Supports stateful fixtures, enabling dynamic component testing

Cons of React Cosmos

• Steeper learning curve due to its more advanced features
• Less focus on documentation generation compared to React Styleguidist
• May require more setup and configuration for basic use cases

Code Comparison

React Cosmos:

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

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

React Styleguidist:

// styleguide.config.js
module.exports = {
  components: 'src/components/**/[A-Z]*.js',
  theme: {
    color: {
      link: 'firebrick',
      linkHover: 'salmon'
    }
  }
};

React Cosmos focuses on creating fixtures for component testing, while React Styleguidist emphasizes documentation and style guide generation. React Cosmos offers more advanced features for component development and testing, but React Styleguidist provides an easier setup for creating component documentation and showcasing components in various states.

Pros of mdx-deck

• Focused on creating slide decks using MDX, offering a simpler and more streamlined approach
• Built-in themes and customization options for quick and easy styling
• Supports live code editing and execution within slides

Cons of mdx-deck

• Limited to presentation-style content, less suitable for comprehensive documentation
• Fewer built-in features for component documentation and testing
• May require additional setup for advanced customization and integration with other tools

Code Comparison

mdx-deck:

import { Head, Notes } from 'mdx-deck'

# My Presentation

---

## Slide 2

<Notes>Speaker notes go here</Notes>

React Styleguidist:

import React from 'react'
import PropTypes from 'prop-types'

/**
 * Button component description
 */
function Button({ children, onClick }) {
  return <button onClick={onClick}>{children}</button>
}

Button.propTypes = {
  children: PropTypes.node.isRequired,
  onClick: PropTypes.func,
}

export default Button

Pros of Spectacle

• Focused specifically on creating presentations and slideshows
• Offers a wide range of pre-built components for slide creation
• Provides a more streamlined API for creating slides quickly

Cons of Spectacle

• Less flexible for general-purpose component documentation
• Limited customization options compared to React Styleguidist
• Steeper learning curve for non-presentation use cases

Code Comparison

React Styleguidist:

import { Button } from './Button';

<Button onClick={() => console.log('Clicked!')}>
  Click me
</Button>

Spectacle:

import { Slide, Text, Appear } from 'spectacle';

<Slide>
  <Text>Welcome to my presentation</Text>
  <Appear><Text>This text will appear</Text></Appear>
</Slide>

React Styleguidist is designed for creating comprehensive component documentation and style guides, offering a more flexible approach to showcasing and testing React components. It excels in generating interactive documentation with live editing capabilities.

Spectacle, on the other hand, is tailored specifically for creating presentations using React. It provides a set of components and utilities optimized for building slideshows, making it easier to create visually appealing presentations quickly.

While both libraries use React, their primary use cases differ. React Styleguidist is better suited for developers looking to document and showcase their component libraries, while Spectacle is ideal for those creating interactive presentations or slideshows using React.