技術

新推出的 JavaScript 套件獲得高滿意度與低使用率,顯示在選擇適合的工具時還是有些難度。這時候不妨看看調查資料吧,或許能為你指引正確的方向。

Each line goes from 2016 to 2020. A higher point means a technology has been used by more people, and a point further to the right means more users want to learn it; or have used it and would use it again.

Negative opinionsPositive opinionsHave usedHave not usedTypeScriptTypeScript20162017201820192020ReasonReason2017201820192020ElmElm20162017201820192020ClojureScriptClojureScript20162017201820192020PureScriptPureScript20192020ReactReact20162017201820192020Vue.jsVue.js20162017201820192020AngularAngular20162017201820192020PreactPreact201820192020EmberEmber20162017201820192020SvelteSvelte20192020ReduxRedux20162017201820192020Apollo ClientApollo Client20162017201820192020GraphQLGraphQL20162017201820192020MobXMobX20162017201820192020RelayRelay20162017201820192020ExpressExpress2017201820192020Next.jsNext.js201820192020KoaKoa2017201820192020MeteorMeteor20162017201820192020GatsbyGatsby20192020HapiHapi20172020JestJest20162017201820192020MochaMocha20162017201820192020StorybookStorybook201820192020CypressCypress20192020AVAAVA20162017201820192020JasmineJasmine20162017201820192020PuppeteerPuppeteer20192020webpackwebpack201620172020GulpGulp201620172020RollupRollup20172020BrowserifyBrowserify201620172020ElectronElectron2017201820192020React NativeReact Native20162017201820192020Native AppsNative Apps20162017201820192020CordovaCordova20162017201820192020IonicIonic2017201820192020NW.jsNW.js20192020ExpoExpo20192020
  • Some lines skip years.
  • Technologies with only one year of data are not shown.

此圖表根據每項技術的全部使用人數顯示滿意比例,劃分成 4 個象限:

  • 評估: 低使用度、高滿意度。是值得關注的技術。

  • 採用: 高使用度、高滿意度。可以放心採用的技術。

  • 迴避: 低使用度、低滿意度。近期最好避免的技術。

  • 分析: 高使用度、低滿意度。如果正在使用這些技術,要進行重新評估。

Note that TypeScript appears twice in the chart because it's included in both the JavaScript Flavors and Build Tools sections.

For each section, which percentage of respondents use (defined as having answered “would use again”) one, two, three, etc. technologies.

1
61.7%
2
4.7%
3
0.9%
4
0.2%
5
0.1%
JavaScript Flavors
1
41.9%
2
29.7%
3
11.8%
4
3.0%
5
0.7%
6
0.2%
7
0.0%
8
0.0%
9
0.0%
Front-end Frameworks
1
28.4%
2
19.9%
3
15.1%
4
5.9%
5
1.1%
6
0.2%
7
0.0%
Data Layer
1
27.8%
2
24.0%
3
14.3%
4
6.6%
5
2.5%
6
0.9%
7
0.3%
8
0.1%
9
0.0%
10
0.0%
Back-end Frameworks
1
13.1%
2
14.3%
3
15.6%
4
13.9%
5
9.5%
6
5.1%
7
1.9%
8
0.5%
9
0.1%
10
0.0%
Testing
1
19.9%
2
28.2%
3
19.3%
4
10.1%
5
3.9%
6
1.2%
7
0.3%
8
0.1%
9
0.0%
10
0.0%
Build Tools
1
19.8%
2
16.9%
3
9.9%
4
3.9%
5
1.2%
6
0.5%
7
0.1%
8
0.0%
9
0.0%
Mobile & Desktop

For each section, which percentage of respondents use (defined as having answered “would use again”) one, two, three, etc. technologies.

Alpine.js
Rome
SWC
Quasar
Stimulus
PureScript
ClojureScript
Playwright
Strapi
Fastify
WebdriverIO
Hapi
LitElement
esbuild
XState
Elm
Snowpack
Relay
NW.js
AVA
Ember
Reason
Capacitor
Expo
Svelte
Gatsby
MobX
Vuex
Testing Library
Parcel
Koa
Native Apps
Nest
Nuxt
Preact
Rollup
Meteor
Ionic
GraphQL
Cypress
TypeScript
Apollo Client
Browserify
Next.js
Mocha
Vue.js
Puppeteer
Cordova
Electron
Angular
Jasmine
Storybook
React Native
webpack
Gulp
TypeScript
Redux
Jest
Express
React