I seems to me that Mithril is inspired by React, and it's awesome that someone is trying to make things better than React.

That said, I have a bad impression of Mithril, because, in any case, its author should bear some respect to React, as a son to his father. But, instead, he appears very arrogant when talking about React (look here: http://lhorie.github.io/mithril/comparison.html#react) as if it was React that was inspired by Mithril and was reimplement Mithril ideas with worse performance.

That bad impression, caused just by words (and other comments from its author here), pulls me away from Mithril, which is a situation I don't love.

I actually think that comparison is fair. Don't read as a negative towards React at all.

I got the same impression.

But I built my web-apps with a similar pattern for years.

Keeping an virtual structure of my components and rendering the delta to the DOM when finished, so React didn't seem like a big deal for me. But I liked, that they baked the idea into a reusable framework.

I'm all for variety, but does someone have to mention that framework every time another one is being talked about?

I get that the creator advertises it here pretty heavily, an that's cool. Doesn't mean everyone else has to as well.

It's relevant because it's similar to React (but more lightweight and claims to be faster). Mentioning it here can be useful for those who are looking for alternatives to React.