Analysis

Compare patterns

Evaluate design patterns side by side across intent, tradeoffs, languages, and integration fit.

Choose patterns

Select up to 3 patterns

Abstract FactoryAdapterBridgeBuilderChain of ResponsibilityCommandCompositeDecoratorFacadeFactory MethodFlyweightInterpreterIteratorMediatorMementoObserverPrototypeProxySingletonStateStrategyTemplate MethodVisitor

Current selection

3 of 3 selected

You can now review the differences across the comparison table below.

Clear all

Analysis

Pattern comparison

Reviewing 3 patterns.

Criteria
structuralAdapterView pattern
structuralDecoratorView pattern
behavioralMediatorView pattern
Basics
Categorystructuralstructuralbehavioral
SummaryConvert the interface of a class or module into another interface clients expect.Wrap an object with other objects that implement the same contract so responsibilities can be layered dynamically.—
IntentAllow incompatible interfaces to work together without changing the consuming code.Wrap an object with other objects that implement the same contract so responsibilities can be layered dynamically.Define an object that encapsulates communication between a set of objects, keeping them from referring to each other directly.
Decision factors
ProblemA client needs to talk to a legacy class or external service whose interface does not match the rest of the codebase.A system needs to add optional behaviors to an object without creating many subclasses for every feature combination.Multiple objects need to coordinate behavior, but direct references between them create tight coupling and complex dependencies.
Tradeoffs
  • Adds an extra layer of indirection.
  • Can hide useful vendor-specific capabilities if overused.
  • Keeps integration code isolated from core domain logic.
  • Can introduce many small wrapper classes that are harder to trace in debugging.
  • Ordering of decorators matters, so composition needs to be deliberate.
  • Keeps responsibilities modular and easy to combine.
  • The mediator can become large and complex if it takes on too much coordination logic.
  • Centralizing behavior can make the mediator a single point of failure if it is poorly designed.
Practical fit
Languages
  • typescript
  • java
  • python
  • go
  • csharp
  • dotnet
  • react
  • angular
  • react-native
  • typescript
  • java
  • python
  • angular
  • react
  • react-native
  • csharp
  • dotnet
  • typescript
  • java
  • python
  • angular
  • react
  • react-native
  • csharp
  • dotnet
Platforms
  • applications
  • apis
  • service layers
  • integrations
  • frontend
  • backend
  • services
  • Web
  • Backend
  • Mobile
  • UI kits
  • Cross-platform systems
Integration notesAdapters are useful when exposing a stable boundary over a legacy API, vendor SDK, or payload format mismatch.Decorators work well for cross-cutting concerns such as logging, retry, caching, compression, and telemetry because each layer keeps the same interface while adding one concern.Mediator is useful for chat systems, form coordination, workflow orchestration, and any domain where many components must collaborate without knowing about each other.