5 ms·

How does this compare to http://c3js.org/ http://c3js.org/, also a reusable charting library using D3.js?

by welder 9y ago

verbify 9y ago
There's also NVD3 - http://nvd3.org/ http://nvd3.org/ - https://github.com/novus/nvd3 https://github.com/novus/nvd3. And there's a product based off NVD3 called sucrose - http://sucrose.io/ http://sucrose.io/ and https://github.com/sugarcrm/sucrose https://github.com/sugarcrm/sucrose.
mshenfield 9y ago
The blog post introducing Britecharts has a good discussion of the difference between it and other reusable charting options: https://www.eventbrite.com/engineering/introducing-britecharts/#comment-9860 https://www.eventbrite.com/engineering/introducing-britechar.... One other big difference is that Britecharts is compatible with the latest version of D3. D3 V4 underwent a major refactor to increase modularity. NVD3 is actively looking for volunteers to help them get there though - https://github.com/novus/nvd3#do-we-support-d3-v4x https://github.com/novus/nvd3#do-we-support-d3-v4x. Disclaimer: I work with the folks who develop Britecharts.
Golodhros 9y ago
That's a great question, and we are preparing a write-up talking about the D3 libraries ecosystem at this moment. There is certainly a good amount of D3 libraries out there, and it could be frustrating to do some research on so many! Specifically, stacked against C3, Britecharts has a more 'D3-like' API, while C3 is a lot more declarative. This means that on C3, we will render charts by passing large configuration objects, while in Britecharts we strive to use a different API, chaining settings like we do on D3. Also, C3 hasn't been updated to D3 v4, and we can say it is an inactive project.
mparr4 9y ago
c3 is decent, but it is no longer maintained and with 675 issues and counting, it's the wrong choice for any new project. We've had it in production for a couple of years now. The best thing about it was it got us off the ground quickly but at this point I think we've likely sunk more hours into debugging issues and hacking features than it would have cost us to have built it with d3.

How does this compare to http://c3js.org/ http://c3js.org/, also a reusable charting library using D3.js?

by welder 9y ago

How does this compare to http://c3js.org/ http://c3js.org/, also a reusable charting library using D3.js?

There's also NVD3 - http://nvd3.org/ http://nvd3.org/ - https://github.com/novus/nvd3 https://github.com/novus/nvd3. And there's a product based off NVD3 called sucrose - http://sucrose.io/ http://sucrose.io/ and https://github.com/sugarcrm/sucrose https://github.com/sugarcrm/sucrose.

mshenfield 9y ago

The blog post introducing Britecharts has a good discussion of the difference between it and other reusable charting options: https://www.eventbrite.com/engineering/introducing-britecharts/#comment-9860 https://www.eventbrite.com/engineering/introducing-britechar.... One other big difference is that Britecharts is compatible with the latest version of D3. D3 V4 underwent a major refactor to increase modularity. NVD3 is actively looking for volunteers to help them get there though - https://github.com/novus/nvd3#do-we-support-d3-v4x https://github.com/novus/nvd3#do-we-support-d3-v4x. Disclaimer: I work with the folks who develop Britecharts.

Golodhros 9y ago

That's a great question, and we are preparing a write-up talking about the D3 libraries ecosystem at this moment. There is certainly a good amount of D3 libraries out there, and it could be frustrating to do some research on so many! Specifically, stacked against C3, Britecharts has a more 'D3-like' API, while C3 is a lot more declarative. This means that on C3, we will render charts by passing large configuration objects, while in Britecharts we strive to use a different API, chaining settings like we do on D3. Also, C3 hasn't been updated to D3 v4, and we can say it is an inactive project.

mparr4 9y ago

c3 is decent, but it is no longer maintained and with 675 issues and counting, it's the wrong choice for any new project. We've had it in production for a couple of years now. The best thing about it was it got us off the ground quickly but at this point I think we've likely sunk more hours into debugging issues and hacking features than it would have cost us to have built it with d3.