4 ms·

While I appreciate the need to compare MVC JavaScript libraries -- lots of folks are looking for a shortcut for evaluating codebases -- I also worry that using

While I appreciate the need to compare MVC JavaScript libraries -- lots of folks are looking for a shortcut for evaluating codebases -- I also worry that using a relatively shallow comparison of a "trivial" example app isn't the best way to make choices. To that extent, I have to apologize for publishing the original Todo example app ;) While TodoMVC is a fine resource, I think it's still important to look at what the different libraries and frameworks choose to do differently ... and most importantly, what sort of real apps have been built with each.

knowtheory 15y ago
Yeah, it's worth noting that picking a common baseline for comparing frameworks is like trying to pick common benchmarks for programming languages. Sure you can write comparable code... but writing benchmarks in multiple languages in an idiomatic style that plays to each language's strengths while still remaining comparable is challenging.
dmvaldman 15y ago
where can we find information on what the different libraries choose to do differently
mofle 15y ago
The thing is, not everyone got the time to wade through the mass of JS frameworks available today. The intention of TodoMVC is to give you a taste of each framework, which can help you narrow it down. You can think of it as speeddating JS frameworks. It's by no means perfect and I agree that it should not be your only source, but it's a lot better than just trying out the most popular one and using that. Disclaimer: I'm one of the devs (Sindre).
legacye 15y ago
(tl;dr I created TodoMVC and agree with many of the points @jashkenas makes above) Whilst at present TodoMVC provides a simplified baseline for comparing JavaScript MV* frameworks, we feel that this at least gives developers an opportunity to narrow down the list of them they wish to explore further. No one should be using TodoMVC as the be all and end all of which framework they use as there's significantly more to it than that. That would be a little silly :) With respect to the comment lower down in the page regarding the nitty gritty not being covered (auth, validation, routing etc.), it's a valid point and we currently have plans for tackling this in version 1.1 of the project. Initially Backbone.js, Spine.js, Ember and CanJS will have complete end-to-end examples offered but we hope to expand upon this as we work our way through releases. At the end of the day, our goal is to make it as easy as possible to find the framework (or frameworks) that best fit your needs and hopefully give you some incentive to investigate one or two in more depth before making your decision on what to use.

knowtheory 15y ago

Yeah, it's worth noting that picking a common baseline for comparing frameworks is like trying to pick common benchmarks for programming languages. Sure you can write comparable code... but writing benchmarks in multiple languages in an idiomatic style that plays to each language's strengths while still remaining comparable is challenging.

dmvaldman 15y ago

where can we find information on what the different libraries choose to do differently

mofle 15y ago

The thing is, not everyone got the time to wade through the mass of JS frameworks available today. The intention of TodoMVC is to give you a taste of each framework, which can help you narrow it down. You can think of it as speeddating JS frameworks. It's by no means perfect and I agree that it should not be your only source, but it's a lot better than just trying out the most popular one and using that. Disclaimer: I'm one of the devs (Sindre).

legacye 15y ago

(tl;dr I created TodoMVC and agree with many of the points @jashkenas makes above) Whilst at present TodoMVC provides a simplified baseline for comparing JavaScript MV* frameworks, we feel that this at least gives developers an opportunity to narrow down the list of them they wish to explore further. No one should be using TodoMVC as the be all and end all of which framework they use as there's significantly more to it than that. That would be a little silly :) With respect to the comment lower down in the page regarding the nitty gritty not being covered (auth, validation, routing etc.), it's a valid point and we currently have plans for tackling this in version 1.1 of the project. Initially Backbone.js, Spine.js, Ember and CanJS will have complete end-to-end examples offered but we hope to expand upon this as we work our way through releases. At the end of the day, our goal is to make it as easy as possible to find the framework (or frameworks) that best fit your needs and hopefully give you some incentive to investigate one or two in more depth before making your decision on what to use.