Developing Modern Web Applications with Rails: Choosing the Right Component Tool

Developing modern web applications requires using reusable, testable, and maintainable components. In the Rails ecosystem, there are several popular alternatives for creating components. Let's explore some of these tools: ViewComponent, Phlex, React + Rails, Rux, and Cells. Each of them has its pros and cons, which we will discuss below with practical examples.

---

ViewComponent

✅ Pros:

• Reusability: Facilitates the creation of reusable and encapsulated components, improving code maintenance and cohesion.
• Testability: Allows more effective unit tests, increasing test coverage and code reliability.
• Performance: Components are ~10x faster than traditional partials, thanks to precompiled templates.
• Structure: Encourages code organization, following patterns similar to Rails controllers and models.

❌ Cons:

• Learning Curve: It can be more challenging for beginners who are not familiar with component concepts.
• Initial Complexity: Requires initial setup and might seem excessive for very small projects.

🔍 Example

# Create the Button component
rails generate component Button title path

# app/components/button_component.rb
class ButtonComponent < ViewComponent::Base
  def initialize(title: ", path:)"
    @title = title
    @path = path
  end
end

# app/components/button_component.html.erb
<a href="<%= @path %>" class="btn">
  <%= @title %>
</a>

# In the template to render the component
<%= render(ButtonComponent.new(title: "\"Click Me\", path: profile_path)) %>"

---

Phlex

✅ Pros:

• Ruby Syntax: Uses an object-oriented approach that can be more intuitive for Ruby developers.
• Performance: Efficient in rendering components.

❌ Cons:

• Smaller Community: Less documentation and support compared to more mature tools.
• Integration: May require significant adjustments to integrate well with existing projects.

🔍 Example

# app/components/button_component.rb
class ButtonComponent < Phlex::HTML
  def initialize(title:, path:)
    @title = title
    @path = path
  end

  def template
    a(href: @path, class: "btn") { @title }
  end
end

# In the template to render the component
<%= ButtonComponent.new(title: "Click Me", path: profile_path).call %>

---

React + Rails

✅ Pros:

• Popularity: Large community and vast resources available.
• Interactivity: Ideal for building dynamic and responsive user interfaces.
• Ecosystem: Strong integration with modern front-end development tools.

❌ Cons:

• Complexity: Adds a layer of complexity, requiring state management and tools like Webpack.
• Performance: Can introduce overhead if not used efficiently.

🔍 Example

# Create the Button component
rails generate react:component Button title:string path:string

// app/javascript/components/Button.js
import React from 'react';

const Button = ({ title, path }) => (
  <a href={path} className="btn">
    {title}
  </a>
);

export default Button;

# In the template to render the component
<%= react_component("Button", { title: "Click Me", path: profile_path }) %>

---

Rux

✅ Pros:

• JSX-like Syntax: Combines the power of JSX with the simplicity of Ruby, making it easier to create visual components.
• Integration: Allows easy integration with existing Ruby libraries and frameworks.

❌ Cons:

• Novelty: Relatively new tool, may have less stability and support.
• Adaptation: Requires a slightly different development mindset, which can be challenging for traditional Ruby developers.

🔍 Example

# app/components/button_component.rux
class ButtonComponent < Rux::Component
  props :title, :path

  def render
    rux do
      a(href: @path, class: "btn") { @title }
    end
  end
end

# In the template to render the component
<%= render(ButtonComponent.new(title: "Click Me", path: profile_path)) %>

---

Cells

✅ Pros:

• Isolation: Isolates view logic in cells, improving modularity.
• Reusability: Facilitates the reuse of components in different parts of the application.

❌ Cons:

• Performance: Can be slower compared to other alternatives due to rendering overhead.
• Learning Curve: Requires familiarity with the cell paradigm, which can be challenging for some developers.

🔍 Example

# Create the Button component
rails generate cell Button title path

# app/cells/button_cell.rb
class ButtonCell < Cell::ViewModel
  property :title
  property :path

  def show
    render
  end
end

# app/cells/button/show.erb
<a href="<%= path %>" class="btn">
  <%= title %>
</a>

# In the template to render the component
<%= cell(:button, title: "Click Me", path: profile_path)) %>

---

🔄 Tool Comparisons

♻️ Reusability and Modularity

• ViewComponent: Excellent for encapsulating and reusing view logic in cohesive components.
• Phlex: Similar to ViewComponent but with a more object-oriented syntax.
• React + Rails: Highly reusable, especially with the vast amount of available React libraries.
• Rux: Good reusability with a syntax approach that resembles JSX.
• Cells: Facilitates the creation of modular and reusable components.

⚡ Performance

• ViewComponent: Superior performance due to precompiled templates.
• Phlex: Efficient in rendering components, though with less community support.
• React + Rails: Can be efficient but requires good state management and optimization to avoid overhead.
• Rux: Promises good performance, but being a new tool, it might not be as well-tested as other options.
• Cells: Can suffer from slower performance due to rendering overhead.

📚 Learning Curve

• ViewComponent: Can be challenging for beginners but powerful for experienced users.
• Phlex: More intuitive for Ruby developers but with less documentation.
• React + Rails: Can have a steep learning curve due to the need to learn both React and Rails.
• Rux: Requires adaptation to a new development mindset.
• Cells: Requires understanding of the cell paradigm, which can be difficult for some developers.

---

Considerations

Choosing the ideal tool for creating components in Rails depends on various factors, including project complexity, team familiarity with the technology, and specific performance and maintenance needs. Here are some additional considerations:

• Project Size: For smaller projects, simpler tools like ViewComponent or Phlex may be more suitable due to their ease of use and lower overhead. In larger projects, using React can be more advantageous due to its ability to manage complex and dynamic user interfaces.

• Team and Knowledge: The learning curve is a crucial factor. If your team is already familiar with React, opting for React + Rails might be the most logical choice. On the other hand, if the team is primarily composed of Ruby developers, tools like Phlex or ViewComponent may provide a smoother integration.

• Maintenance and Testability: ViewComponent and Cells offer significant advantages in terms of testability and maintenance. If code quality and test coverage are priorities, these tools should be considered.

• Performance: Tools like ViewComponent and Phlex offer excellent performance due to efficient rendering. If performance is a critical factor, these tools should be closely examined.

Regardless of the choice, creating components can significantly improve the quality, maintenance, and scalability of your code. By adopting one of these tools, you will be better prepared to face the challenges of modern web development.

Good luck with developing your components in Rails! Happy coding!

Comments

[Rails Designer]

Been happy user of ViewComponent since its early beginnings. ✊