toml

Pros of toml (uiri)

• Pure Python implementation, making it easier to install and use in Python-only environments
• Supports both Python 2 and Python 3
• Includes a command-line interface for validating TOML files

Cons of toml (uiri)

• Generally slower performance compared to toml (BurntSushi)
• Less actively maintained, with fewer recent updates and contributions
• May have fewer advanced features or optimizations

Code Comparison

toml (uiri):

import toml

data = toml.load("example.toml")
toml_string = toml.dumps(data)

toml (BurntSushi):

import tomlkit

data = tomlkit.parse(open("example.toml").read())
toml_string = tomlkit.dumps(data)

Both libraries provide similar functionality for parsing and writing TOML files, but their implementations and performance characteristics differ. The BurntSushi version is written in Rust with Python bindings, offering better performance, while the uiri version is a pure Python implementation, providing easier installation and broader Python version support.

Pros of go-toml

• Supports both TOML v0.4.0 and v1.0.0 specifications
• Provides a query language for extracting data from TOML documents
• Offers both marshaling and unmarshaling capabilities

Cons of go-toml

• Generally slower performance compared to toml
• More complex API, which may be harder to use for simple tasks
• Larger codebase, potentially leading to a bigger binary size

Code Comparison

toml:

type Config struct {
    Name string `toml:"name"`
    Age  int    `toml:"age"`
}

var conf Config
_, err := toml.DecodeFile("config.toml", &conf)

go-toml:

tree, err := toml.LoadFile("config.toml")
name := tree.Get("name").(string)
age := tree.Get("age").(int64)

Both libraries offer straightforward ways to parse TOML files, but go-toml provides more flexibility with its tree-based approach, while toml focuses on direct struct unmarshaling. The choice between them depends on specific project requirements, with toml being simpler for basic use cases and go-toml offering more advanced features at the cost of complexity.

Pros of toml-rs

• More actively maintained with frequent updates
• Supports TOML v1.0 specification
• Provides better error messages and diagnostics

Cons of toml-rs

• Slightly slower parsing performance
• Less widespread adoption in the Rust ecosystem

Code Comparison

toml-rs:

use toml_rs::from_str;

let config: MyConfig = from_str(toml_str)?;

toml:

use toml::from_str;

let config: MyConfig = from_str(toml_str)?;

Both libraries offer similar APIs for parsing TOML data, with the main difference being the crate name used in the import statement.

toml-rs and toml are both popular TOML parsing libraries for Rust. While toml (BurntSushi's implementation) has been the de facto standard for a long time, toml-rs has gained traction due to its active maintenance and support for the latest TOML specification.

toml-rs offers improved error handling and diagnostics, which can be beneficial for debugging and providing user-friendly error messages. However, it may have slightly lower parsing performance compared to toml.

The choice between the two libraries often comes down to specific project requirements, such as the need for the latest TOML features or compatibility with existing codebases.