Pros of draw.io

• More comprehensive and feature-rich diagramming tool
• Supports a wider range of diagram types and use cases
• Larger community and more frequent updates

Cons of draw.io

• Steeper learning curve due to its extensive feature set
• Heavier and potentially slower for simple wireframing tasks
• More complex UI that may be overwhelming for beginners

Code Comparison

draw.io (JavaScript):

var graph = new mxGraph(container);
var parent = graph.getDefaultParent();
graph.getModel().beginUpdate();
try {
  var v1 = graph.insertVertex(parent, null, 'Hello,', 20, 20, 80, 30);
  var v2 = graph.insertVertex(parent, null, 'World!', 200, 150, 80, 30);
  var e1 = graph.insertEdge(parent, null, '', v1, v2);
} finally {
  graph.getModel().endUpdate();
}

Wireflow (JavaScript):

const node = new Node({
  id: 'node1',
  type: 'rectangle',
  position: { x: 100, y: 100 },
  data: { label: 'Hello, World!' }
});
graph.addNode(node);

Note: The code comparison showcases the difference in complexity and approach between the two libraries for creating basic diagram elements.

Pros of mxgraph

• More mature and feature-rich library with extensive documentation
• Supports a wider range of diagram types and use cases
• Larger community and ecosystem with more resources available

Cons of mxgraph

• Steeper learning curve due to its complexity and extensive API
• Heavier footprint, which may impact performance in some scenarios
• Less modern development approach compared to Wireflow

Code Comparison

mxgraph:

var graph = new mxGraph(container);
var parent = graph.getDefaultParent();
graph.getModel().beginUpdate();
try {
  var v1 = graph.insertVertex(parent, null, 'Hello,', 20, 20, 80, 30);
  var v2 = graph.insertVertex(parent, null, 'World!', 200, 150, 80, 30);
  var e1 = graph.insertEdge(parent, null, '', v1, v2);
} finally {
  graph.getModel().endUpdate();
}

Wireflow:

const graph = new Graph();
const node1 = graph.createNode({ label: 'Hello,' });
const node2 = graph.createNode({ label: 'World!' });
graph.createEdge(node1, node2);
graph.render();

The code comparison shows that mxgraph requires more boilerplate and explicit management of the graph model, while Wireflow offers a more concise and modern API for creating and rendering graphs.

Pros of Excalidraw

• More active development with frequent updates and contributions
• Broader feature set, including collaboration and library support
• Larger community and user base, leading to more resources and support

Cons of Excalidraw

• Steeper learning curve due to more complex features
• Potentially overwhelming for users seeking a simple wireframing tool
• Larger codebase, which may impact performance on slower devices

Code Comparison

Excalidraw (React-based rendering):

export const renderElement = (
  element: ExcalidrawElement,
  rc: RoughCanvas,
  context: CanvasRenderingContext2D,
  renderConfig: RenderConfig,
) => {
  switch (element.type) {
    case "rectangle":
      renderRectangle(element, rc, context, renderConfig);
      break;
    // ... other cases
  }
};

Wireflow (SVG-based rendering):

const drawRectangle = (element) => {
  const rect = document.createElementNS("http://www.w3.org/2000/svg", "rect");
  rect.setAttribute("x", element.x);
  rect.setAttribute("y", element.y);
  rect.setAttribute("width", element.width);
  rect.setAttribute("height", element.height);
  return rect;
};

This comparison highlights the different approaches to rendering elements in each project, with Excalidraw using React and canvas-based rendering, while Wireflow utilizes SVG for drawing shapes.

Pros of yjs

• More versatile, supporting various data types and use cases beyond just flowcharts
• Offers real-time collaboration features out-of-the-box
• Actively maintained with frequent updates and a larger community

Cons of yjs

• Steeper learning curve due to its more complex architecture
• Requires additional setup and integration for specific use cases like flowcharts
• May have higher overhead for simpler projects that don't need all its features

Code Comparison

yjs:

import * as Y from 'yjs'
import { WebsocketProvider } from 'y-websocket'

const ydoc = new Y.Doc()
const provider = new WebsocketProvider('ws://localhost:1234', 'my-roomname', ydoc)
const ymap = ydoc.getMap('mymap')

wireflow:

import Wireflow from 'wireflow'

const wireflow = new Wireflow({
  container: document.getElementById('wireflow-container'),
  data: initialData
})

Summary

yjs is a more powerful and flexible solution for real-time collaboration, suitable for complex applications. wireflow is simpler and more focused on flowchart creation, making it easier to use for specific diagram-related tasks. The choice between them depends on the project's requirements and the developer's familiarity with each library.

Pros of Joint

• More comprehensive and feature-rich diagramming library
• Extensive documentation and examples
• Active development and larger community support

Cons of Joint

• Steeper learning curve due to complexity
• Heavier library size, potentially impacting performance

Code Comparison

Wireflow:

const diagram = new Wireflow('#diagram');
diagram.addNode({
  id: 'node1',
  label: 'Start'
});

Joint:

const graph = new joint.dia.Graph();
const paper = new joint.dia.Paper({
  el: document.getElementById('diagram'),
  model: graph
});
const rect = new joint.shapes.standard.Rectangle();
rect.position(100, 30);
rect.resize(100, 40);
rect.attr({
  body: { fill: 'blue' },
  label: { text: 'Start', fill: 'white' }
});
rect.addTo(graph);

Wireflow offers a simpler API for basic diagramming, while Joint provides more granular control over element properties and styling. Joint's code is more verbose but allows for greater customization of diagram elements.

Pros of X6

• More comprehensive and feature-rich library for graph visualization and interaction
• Extensive documentation and examples available
• Active development with frequent updates and community support

Cons of X6

• Steeper learning curve due to its complexity and extensive API
• Larger file size and potentially higher performance overhead
• May be overkill for simpler flowchart or diagram needs

Code Comparison

X6:

import { Graph } from '@antv/x6';

const graph = new Graph({
  container: document.getElementById('container'),
  width: 800,
  height: 600,
});

graph.addNode({
  x: 100,
  y: 100,
  width: 80,
  height: 40,
  label: 'Hello',
});

Wireflow:

import Wireflow from 'wireflow';

const wireflow = new Wireflow({
  container: document.getElementById('container'),
});

wireflow.addNode({
  id: 'node1',
  type: 'default',
  position: { x: 100, y: 100 },
  data: { label: 'Hello' },
});

X6 offers a more robust and flexible API for creating complex graphs, while Wireflow provides a simpler approach for basic flowcharts. X6's extensive features make it suitable for advanced use cases, but Wireflow may be more accessible for quick prototyping or simpler diagrams.