Pros of Context-Menu.Android

• More complex and feature-rich, offering a customizable circular context menu
• Provides smooth animations and transitions for menu items
• Supports both icon and text-based menu items

Cons of Context-Menu.Android

• Steeper learning curve due to its complexity
• May require more setup and configuration
• Potentially higher performance overhead for complex menus

Code Comparison

TastyToast:

TastyToast.makeText(getApplicationContext(), "Hello World!", TastyToast.LENGTH_LONG, TastyToast.WARNING);

Context-Menu.Android:

MenuObject close = new MenuObject("Close");
close.setResource(R.drawable.icn_close);

MenuParams menuParams = new MenuParams();
menuParams.setActionBarSize((int) getResources().getDimension(R.dimen.tool_bar_height));
menuParams.setMenuObjects(getMenuObjects());
menuParams.setClosableOutside(false);
mMenuDialogFragment = ContextMenuDialogFragment.newInstance(menuParams);

Summary

TastyToast is a simpler library focused on creating stylish toast notifications, while Context-Menu.Android offers a more complex and customizable circular context menu. TastyToast is easier to implement but has limited functionality, whereas Context-Menu.Android provides more features but requires more setup. The choice between the two depends on the specific needs of your project and the desired user interface.

Pros of StyleableToast

• More customization options, including custom fonts and icons
• Supports both Kotlin and Java
• Actively maintained with recent updates

Cons of StyleableToast

• Slightly more complex implementation due to additional features
• Larger library size compared to TastyToast

Code Comparison

TastyToast:

TastyToast.makeText(getApplicationContext(), "Hello World!", TastyToast.LENGTH_LONG, TastyToast.SUCCESS);

StyleableToast:

StyleableToast.Builder(context)
    .text("Hello World!")
    .textColor(Color.WHITE)
    .backgroundColor(Color.BLUE)
    .show()

Summary

StyleableToast offers more customization options and supports both Kotlin and Java, making it a versatile choice for developers who want fine-grained control over their toast notifications. It's actively maintained, ensuring compatibility with the latest Android versions.

TastyToast, on the other hand, provides a simpler implementation with predefined styles, which can be beneficial for quick integration and smaller project sizes. However, it offers less customization and hasn't been updated recently.

Both libraries serve the purpose of creating custom toast notifications, but StyleableToast is more feature-rich and flexible, while TastyToast focuses on simplicity and ease of use.

Pros of Toasty

• More customization options, including icon support and tint color
• Larger community and more frequent updates
• Better documentation and usage examples

Cons of Toasty

• Slightly larger library size
• Requires more setup code for basic usage

Code Comparison

TastyToast:

TastyToast.makeText(getApplicationContext(), "Hello World!", TastyToast.LENGTH_LONG, TastyToast.SUCCESS);

Toasty:

Toasty.Config.getInstance()
    .setTextColor(Color.WHITE)
    .apply();
Toasty.success(getApplicationContext(), "Hello World!", Toast.LENGTH_SHORT, true).show();

Both libraries offer enhanced toast notifications for Android, but Toasty provides more customization options and has a larger community. TastyToast has a simpler API for basic usage, while Toasty requires more setup but offers greater flexibility. Toasty supports custom icons and tint colors, making it more versatile for complex UI designs. However, this comes at the cost of a slightly larger library size. TastyToast is more lightweight and straightforward, which may be preferable for simpler projects. Ultimately, the choice between the two depends on the specific requirements of your Android application and the level of customization you need for your toast notifications.

Pros of FancyToast-Android

• More customization options, including custom icons and fonts
• Supports both Kotlin and Java
• Includes a builder pattern for easier toast creation

Cons of FancyToast-Android

• Larger library size due to additional features
• Slightly more complex implementation compared to TastyToast

Code Comparison

TastyToast:

TastyToast.makeText(getApplicationContext(), "Hello World!", TastyToast.LENGTH_LONG, TastyToast.SUCCESS);

FancyToast-Android:

FancyToast.makeText(this, "Hello World!", FancyToast.LENGTH_LONG, FancyToast.SUCCESS, false).show()

Both libraries offer similar basic functionality for creating custom toasts. However, FancyToast-Android provides more advanced features and customization options. It supports both Kotlin and Java, making it more versatile for different Android development environments.

TastyToast is simpler to implement and has a smaller library size, which may be preferable for projects with limited resources or those requiring only basic toast functionality.

FancyToast-Android's builder pattern allows for more flexible toast creation, but it may require slightly more code for basic use cases. The choice between the two libraries ultimately depends on the specific needs of the project and the desired level of customization for toast messages.

Pros of SuperToasts

• More customization options for toast appearance and behavior
• Supports multiple toast types (success, error, info, warning)
• Includes additional features like progress bars and buttons in toasts

Cons of SuperToasts

• Larger library size due to more features
• Slightly more complex implementation for basic use cases
• Less frequent updates and maintenance

Code Comparison

TastyToast:

TastyToast.makeText(getApplicationContext(), "Hello World!", TastyToast.LENGTH_LONG, TastyToast.SUCCESS);

SuperToasts:

SuperToast.create(this, "Hello World!", Style.DURATION_LONG)
    .setStyle(Style.GREEN)
    .setIcon(R.drawable.icon_success, IconPosition.LEFT)
    .show();

Both libraries offer simple ways to create and display toasts, but SuperToasts provides more customization options in a single method chain. TastyToast has a more straightforward API for basic use cases, while SuperToasts allows for more detailed customization of appearance and behavior.

TastyToast is lighter and easier to implement for simple toast messages, while SuperToasts offers more advanced features at the cost of a slightly more complex API and larger library size.

Pros of MotionToast

• More customizable with additional toast types and styles
• Supports Jetpack Compose for modern Android development
• Actively maintained with recent updates and contributions

Cons of MotionToast

• Larger library size due to additional features and dependencies
• Steeper learning curve for developers new to Jetpack Compose
• May require more setup and configuration compared to TastyToast

Code Comparison

TastyToast:

TastyToast.makeText(context, "Hello World!", TastyToast.LENGTH_LONG, TastyToast.SUCCESS);

MotionToast:

MotionToast.createColorToast(this,
    "Hurray success 😍",
    "Upload Completed successfully!",
    MotionToastStyle.SUCCESS,
    MotionToast.GRAVITY_BOTTOM,
    MotionToast.LONG_DURATION,
    ResourcesCompat.getFont(this, R.font.helvetica_regular))

The code comparison shows that MotionToast offers more customization options, including custom fonts and positioning, while TastyToast provides a simpler API with fewer parameters. MotionToast's implementation is more verbose but allows for greater flexibility in toast appearance and behavior.