Head-to-Head: Aphrodite vs Bulma Analysis

aphrodite

v2.4.0(over 4 years ago)

This package was last published over a year ago. It may not be actively maintained.Types definitions are bundled with the npm packageNumber of direct dependencies: 3Monthly npm downloads

Aphrodite is a JavaScript library for inline styling in React applications. It provides a convenient way to define and apply styles directly within your components using JavaScript objects. Aphrodite uses CSS-in-JS approach, allowing you to write styles in JavaScript and have them automatically converted to CSS at runtime.

Alternatives:
emotion+
styled-components+
glamorous+
jss+
linaria+
styletron+
goober+
stitches+
treat+
typestyle+

Tags: javascriptreactstylingcss-in-jsperformance

bulma

v0.9.4(almost 2 years ago)

This package was last published over a year ago. It may not be actively maintained.The package doesn't have any types definitionsNumber of direct dependencies: 0Monthly npm downloads

Bulma is a modern and lightweight CSS framework that provides a set of responsive and customizable UI components. It follows a mobile-first approach and is designed to be easy to use and highly flexible. With Bulma, you can quickly build professional-looking websites and web applications with minimal effort.

Alternatives:
tailwindcss+
bootstrap+
foundation-sites+
tachyons+
skeleton+
milligram+
spectre.css+
semantic-ui-css+
uikit+
primer-css+

Tags: cssframeworkresponsivecustomizableui-components

Fight!

Popularity

Bulma is a highly popular CSS framework known for its simplicity and flexibility. It has a large community and is widely used in web development. Aphrodite, on the other hand, is a CSS-in-JS library developed by Facebook and is not as widely known or popular as Bulma.

CSS-in-JS vs CSS framework

Aphrodite is a CSS-in-JS library that allows you to write CSS styles in JavaScript. It provides a way to dynamically generate and manage CSS styles at runtime. Bulma, on the other hand, is a traditional CSS framework that provides pre-defined styles and components.

Customization and Theming

Aphrodite offers more flexibility when it comes to customization and theming. Since CSS is written in JavaScript, you can easily manipulate styles using logic and dynamically create styles based on application state. Bulma, while customizable to some extent, is more opinionated and provides a specific set of styles and components.

Learning Curve

Bulma has a shallow learning curve as it offers pre-built classes that can be directly applied to HTML elements. It is easy to get started with Bulma, especially for developers already familiar with CSS frameworks. Aphrodite, being a CSS-in-JS library, has a steeper learning curve as it requires understanding of JavaScript and the library's API for managing and applying styles.

Integration with React

Aphrodite is specifically designed for React and integrates well with the React component model. It has a small footprint and can easily be used alongside other React libraries. Bulma, being a CSS framework, can be used with any JavaScript framework including React.

Community and Support

Bulma has a large and active community and there are plenty of resources, tutorials, and third-party libraries available to enhance the development experience. Aphrodite, while backed by Facebook, has a smaller community and fewer resources compared to Bulma.