Pros of platform

• Official NgRx library, providing core state management functionality
• Extensive documentation and community support
• Regular updates and maintenance from the NgRx team

Cons of platform

• Steeper learning curve for beginners
• Requires more boilerplate code for setup
• Lacks pre-built UI components and styling

Code Comparison

angular-ngrx-material-starter:

@Effect()
login$ = this.actions$.pipe(
  ofType(AuthActionTypes.LOGIN),
  map((action: Login) => action.payload),
  exhaustMap((auth) =>
    this.authService.login(auth).pipe(
      map((user) => new LoginSuccess({ user })),
      catchError((error) => of(new LoginFailure({ error })))
    )
  )
);

platform:

login$ = createEffect(() =>
  this.actions$.pipe(
    ofType(login),
    exhaustMap(({ username, password }) =>
      this.authService.login(username, password).pipe(
        map((user) => loginSuccess({ user })),
        catchError((error) => of(loginFailure({ error })))
      )
    )
  )
);

The code comparison shows that platform uses a more modern, functional approach with createEffect, while angular-ngrx-material-starter uses the older @Effect decorator. Both achieve similar results, but platform's syntax is more concise and aligned with current NgRx best practices.

Pros of angular-cli

• Official Angular tool for project scaffolding and development
• Extensive documentation and community support
• Regularly updated with new Angular features and best practices

Cons of angular-cli

• Less opinionated about project structure and state management
• Requires additional setup for advanced features like NgRx and Material Design
• May have a steeper learning curve for beginners

Code Comparison

angular-cli (default component):

import { Component } from '@angular/core';

@Component({
  selector: 'app-root',
  templateUrl: './app.component.html',
  styleUrls: ['./app.component.css']
})
export class AppComponent {
  title = 'my-app';
}

angular-ngrx-material-starter (example component):

import { Component, OnInit, ChangeDetectionStrategy } from '@angular/core';
import { Store, select } from '@ngrx/store';
import { Observable } from 'rxjs';
import { selectIsAuthenticated } from './core/auth/auth.selectors';

@Component({
  selector: 'anms-root',
  templateUrl: './app.component.html',
  styleUrls: ['./app.component.scss'],
  changeDetection: ChangeDetectionStrategy.OnPush
})
export class AppComponent implements OnInit {
  isAuthenticated$: Observable<boolean>;

  constructor(private store: Store) {}

  ngOnInit() {
    this.isAuthenticated$ = this.store.pipe(select(selectIsAuthenticated));
  }
}

The angular-ngrx-material-starter example shows integration with NgRx for state management and follows more advanced Angular practices, while the angular-cli example provides a simpler starting point for basic applications.

Pros of Angular Material

• Official Angular component library, ensuring long-term support and compatibility
• Extensive documentation and community support
• Comprehensive set of pre-built, accessible UI components

Cons of Angular Material

• Less opinionated about application structure and state management
• Requires additional setup for features like routing and state management
• May need more customization for complex application requirements

Code Comparison

Angular Material (basic setup):

import { MatButtonModule } from '@angular/material/button';

@NgModule({
  imports: [MatButtonModule],
})
export class AppModule { }

Angular-ngrx-material-starter (includes NgRx setup):

import { StoreModule } from '@ngrx/store';
import { EffectsModule } from '@ngrx/effects';

@NgModule({
  imports: [
    StoreModule.forRoot(reducers, { metaReducers }),
    EffectsModule.forRoot([AppEffects])
  ],
})
export class AppModule { }

Angular Material focuses on providing UI components, while Angular-ngrx-material-starter offers a more complete application structure with state management integrated. The latter provides a more opinionated starting point for complex applications, including NgRx setup out of the box. Angular Material, being more flexible, requires developers to make additional architectural decisions but offers greater customization potential for diverse project needs.

Pros of ngx-admin

• More comprehensive UI components and pre-built pages
• Extensive theming options with multiple color schemes
• Better suited for large-scale enterprise applications

Cons of ngx-admin

• Steeper learning curve due to its complexity
• Potentially bloated with features that may not be needed
• Less focus on state management patterns like NgRx

Code Comparison

angular-ngrx-material-starter:

@NgModule({
  imports: [
    StoreModule.forRoot(reducers, { metaReducers }),
    StoreRouterConnectingModule.forRoot(),
    EffectsModule.forRoot([AuthEffects, GoogleAnalyticsEffects])
  ]
})

ngx-admin:

@NgModule({
  imports: [
    ThemeModule,
    NbMenuModule.forRoot(),
    NbLayoutModule,
    NbEvaIconsModule
  ]
})

The code snippets highlight the different focus areas of each project. angular-ngrx-material-starter emphasizes state management with NgRx, while ngx-admin concentrates on UI components and theming.

angular-ngrx-material-starter is more suitable for developers who prioritize robust state management and prefer a leaner starting point. It's ideal for projects that require a solid foundation in Angular best practices and NgRx integration.

ngx-admin, on the other hand, is better for rapid prototyping of complex admin interfaces or when a wide range of pre-built UI components is needed. It's particularly useful for projects that require extensive customization options and don't necessarily need advanced state management out of the box.

Pros of angularspree

• Focused on e-commerce functionality, providing a more specialized solution for online stores
• Includes features like product catalog, shopping cart, and order management out of the box
• Integrates with Spree Commerce backend, offering a robust and scalable e-commerce platform

Cons of angularspree

• Less frequently updated compared to angular-ngrx-material-starter
• More complex setup due to its dependency on Spree Commerce backend
• Limited customization options for non-e-commerce applications

Code Comparison

angular-ngrx-material-starter:

@NgModule({
  imports: [
    StoreModule.forRoot(reducers, { metaReducers }),
    StoreRouterConnectingModule.forRoot(),
    environment.production ? [] : StoreDevtoolsModule.instrument()
  ],
  // ...
})

angularspree:

@NgModule({
  imports: [
    BrowserModule,
    HttpClientModule,
    HomeModule,
    LayoutModule,
    CoreModule,
    StoreModule.forRoot(reducers, { metaReducers }),
    // ...
  ],
  // ...
})

Both projects use NgRx for state management, but angularspree includes more specific modules related to e-commerce functionality. The angular-ngrx-material-starter focuses on providing a more general-purpose starter template with Material Design integration.

Pros of material-dashboard-angular2

• Offers a more comprehensive and polished dashboard UI out of the box
• Includes a wider variety of pre-built components and layouts
• Provides better documentation and examples for quick implementation

Cons of material-dashboard-angular2

• Less focus on state management (NgRx) compared to angular-ngrx-material-starter
• May require more customization for specific use cases
• Potentially steeper learning curve for developers new to Angular Material

Code Comparison

angular-ngrx-material-starter:

@NgModule({
  imports: [
    StoreModule.forRoot(reducers, { metaReducers }),
    StoreRouterConnectingModule.forRoot(),
    EffectsModule.forRoot([AuthEffects, GoogleAnalyticsEffects])
  ]
})

material-dashboard-angular2:

@NgModule({
  imports: [
    MatButtonModule,
    MatRippleModule,
    MatFormFieldModule,
    MatInputModule,
    MatSelectModule,
    MatTooltipModule
  ]
})

The code snippets highlight the different focus areas of the two projects. angular-ngrx-material-starter emphasizes state management with NgRx, while material-dashboard-angular2 concentrates on Angular Material components for UI development.