Head-to-Head: Aphrodite vs Bulma Analysis

aphrodite

v2.4.0(almost 5 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 managing CSS styles in a dynamic and efficient way. It allows developers to write styles using JavaScript objects and provides a unique approach to inline styles by generating CSS classes at runtime. Aphrodite offers features like automatic vendor prefixing, media queries, and pseudo-selectors, making it easy to create responsive and cross-browser compatible styles.

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

Tags: javascriptcssstylesdynamic-stylingperformance

bulma

v1.0.1(about 1 month ago)

This package is actively maintained.The package doesn't have any types definitionsNumber of direct dependencies: 0Monthly npm downloads

Bulma is a modern CSS framework based on Flexbox that offers a clean and modular design for building responsive web interfaces. It provides a wide range of customizable components and utilities, making it easy to create visually appealing layouts without the need for additional JavaScript. Bulma's documentation is comprehensive and beginner-friendly, offering clear examples and guidelines for implementation.

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

Tags: cssframeworkflexboxresponsivemodular

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.