StackShareStackShare
Follow on
StackShare

Discover and share technology stacks from companies around the world.

Follow on

© 2025 StackShare. All rights reserved.

Product

  • Stacks
  • Tools
  • Feed

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  1. Stackups
  2. Business Tools
  3. UI Components
  4. Javascript UI Libraries
  5. Inferno vs React

Inferno vs React

OverviewDecisionsComparisonAlternatives

Overview

React
React
Stacks182.6K
Followers147.0K
Votes4.1K
GitHub Stars240.3K
Forks49.7K
Inferno
Inferno
Stacks25
Followers64
Votes20

Inferno vs React: What are the differences?

Introduction

Inferno and React are both JavaScript libraries used for building user interfaces. While they share many similarities, there are key differences that set them apart.

  1. Virtual DOM vs. real DOM: One major difference between Inferno and React lies in their approach to updating the DOM. Inferno uses a highly optimized Virtual DOM implementation, which allows it to achieve faster rendering and higher performance compared to React's real DOM approach. Inferno updates only the specific parts of the DOM that have changed, resulting in reduced memory usage and faster updates.

  2. Size and performance: Inferno boasts a significantly smaller package size compared to React. This smaller footprint translates into faster load times and improved performance, especially on low-end devices or slower network connections. It also means that Inferno is a good choice for applications with strict size constraints.

  3. Lifecycle methods: Inferno and React have similar lifecycle methods, but there are some differences in their implementation. Inferno omits certain less frequently used lifecycle methods, such as componentWillUpdate and componentWillReceiveProps, to keep its core footprint small. However, these methods can still be accessed using the react-component package in Inferno.

  4. Type checking and prop validation: React has built-in support for type checking and prop validation using PropTypes. It allows developers to specify the expected types of props for a component, helping catch errors early on. Inferno, on the other hand, does not have built-in support for PropTypes, but developers can use external libraries like inferno-types to achieve similar functionality.

  5. Community and ecosystem: React has a larger and more established community compared to Inferno. This means that React has a wider range of third-party libraries, tools, and resources available. Inferno, while gaining popularity, has a smaller community and a more limited ecosystem.

  6. Compatibility with existing React code: Inferno aims to be a drop-in replacement for React, which means that existing React components can be used with Inferno. However, due to some differences in implementation and lifecycle methods, there may be cases where changes are required for seamless interoperability between React and Inferno applications.

In Summary, Inferno and React differ in their DOM manipulation approach, size and performance, lifecycle methods, type checking and prop validation, community and ecosystem, as well as compatibility with existing React code.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs
CLI (Node.js)
or
Manual

Advice on React, Inferno

Cyrus
Cyrus

Aug 15, 2019

Needs adviceonVue.jsVue.jsReactReact

I find using Vue.js to be easier (more concise / less boilerplate) and more intuitive than writing React. However, there are a lot more readily available React components that I can just plug into my projects. I'm debating whether to use Vue.js or React for an upcoming project that I'm going to use to help teach a friend how to build an interactive frontend. Which would you recommend I use?

884k views884k
Comments
Cyrus
Cyrus

Aug 15, 2019

Needs advice

Simple datepickers are cumbersome. For such a simple data input, I feel like it takes far too much effort. Ideally, the native input[type="date"] would just work like it does on FF and Chrome, but Safari and Edge don't handle it properly. So I'm left either having a diverging experience based on the browser or I need to choose a library to implement a datepicker since users aren't good at inputing formatted strings.

For React alone there are tons of examples to use https://reactjsexample.com/tag/date/. And then of course there's the bootstrap datepicker (https://bootstrap-datepicker.readthedocs.io/en/latest/), jQueryUI calendar picker, https://github.com/flatpickr/flatpickr, and many more.

How do you recommend going about handling date and time inputs? And then there's always moment.js, but I've observed some users getting stuck when presented with a blank text field. I'm curious to hear what's worked well for people...

401k views401k
Comments
Malek
Malek

Web developer at Quicktext

Mar 28, 2020

Decided

The project is a web gadget previously made using vanilla script and JQuery, It is a part of the "Quicktext" platform and offers an in-app live & customizable messaging widget. We made that remake with React eco-system and Typescript and we're so far happy with results. We gained tons of TS features, React scaling & re-usabilities capabilities and much more!

What do you think?

244k views244k
Comments

Detailed Comparison

React
React
Inferno
Inferno

Lots of people use React as the V in MVC. Since React makes no assumptions about the rest of your technology stack, it's easy to try it out on a small feature in an existing project.

Inferno is an isomorphic library for building high-performance user interfaces, which is crucial when targeting mobile devices. Unlike typical virtual DOM libraries like React, Mithril, Virtual-dom, Snabbdom and Om, Inferno uses techniques to separate static and dynamic content. This allows Inferno to only "diff" renders that have dynamic values.

Declarative; Component-based; Learn once, write anywhere
One of the fastest front-end frameworks for rendering UI in the DOM;Components have a similar API to React ES2015 components with inferno-component;Stateless components are fully supported and have more usability thanks to Inferno's hooks system;Isomorphic/universal for easy server-side rendering with inferno-server
Statistics
GitHub Stars
240.3K
GitHub Stars
-
GitHub Forks
49.7K
GitHub Forks
-
Stacks
182.6K
Stacks
25
Followers
147.0K
Followers
64
Votes
4.1K
Votes
20
Pros & Cons
Pros
  • 837
    Components
  • 674
    Virtual dom
  • 579
    Performance
  • 509
    Simplicity
  • 442
    Composable
Cons
  • 41
    Requires discipline to keep architecture organized
  • 30
    No predefined way to structure your app
  • 29
    Need to be familiar with lots of third party packages
  • 13
    JSX
  • 10
    Not enterprise friendly
Pros
  • 4
    Faster than React
  • 4
    React-like api
  • 3
    Smaller bundles
  • 3
    Faster than Angular
  • 3
    Compatibility package for existing React apps

What are some alternatives to React, Inferno?

jQuery

jQuery

jQuery is a cross-platform JavaScript library designed to simplify the client-side scripting of HTML.

AngularJS

AngularJS

AngularJS lets you write client-side web applications as if you had a smarter browser. It lets you use good old HTML (or HAML, Jade and friends!) as your template language and lets you extend HTML’s syntax to express your application’s components clearly and succinctly. It automatically synchronizes data from your UI (view) with your JavaScript objects (model) through 2-way data binding.

Vue.js

Vue.js

It is a library for building interactive web interfaces. It provides data-reactive components with a simple and flexible API.

jQuery UI

jQuery UI

Whether you're building highly interactive web applications or you just need to add a date picker to a form control, jQuery UI is the perfect choice.

Svelte

Svelte

If you've ever built a JavaScript application, the chances are you've encountered – or at least heard of – frameworks like React, Angular, Vue and Ractive. Like Svelte, these tools all share a goal of making it easy to build slick interactive user interfaces. Rather than interpreting your application code at run time, your app is converted into ideal JavaScript at build time. That means you don't pay the performance cost of the framework's abstractions, or incur a penalty when your app first loads.

Flux

Flux

Flux is the application architecture that Facebook uses for building client-side web applications. It complements React's composable view components by utilizing a unidirectional data flow. It's more of a pattern rather than a formal framework, and you can start using Flux immediately without a lot of new code.

Famo.us

Famo.us

Famo.us is a free and open source JavaScript platform for building mobile apps and desktop experiences. What makes Famo.us unique is its JavaScript rendering engine and 3D physics engine that gives developers the power and tools to build native quality apps and animations using pure JavaScript.

Riot

Riot

Riot brings custom tags to all browsers. Think React + Polymer but with enjoyable syntax and a small learning curve.

Marko

Marko

Marko is a really fast and lightweight HTML-based templating engine that compiles templates to readable Node.js-compatible JavaScript modules, and it works on the server and in the browser. It supports streaming, async rendering and custom tags.

Kendo UI

Kendo UI

Fast, light, complete: 70+ jQuery-based UI widgets in one powerful toolset. AngularJS integration, Bootstrap support, mobile controls, offline data solution.

Related Comparisons

Bootstrap
Materialize

Bootstrap vs Materialize

Laravel
Django

Django vs Laravel vs Node.js

Bootstrap
Foundation

Bootstrap vs Foundation vs Material UI

Node.js
Spring Boot

Node.js vs Spring-Boot

Liquibase
Flyway

Flyway vs Liquibase