Pros of mall

• More comprehensive documentation and guides
• Actively maintained with frequent updates
• Larger community and more stars on GitHub

Cons of mall

• More complex architecture, potentially steeper learning curve
• Heavier resource requirements due to its comprehensive nature

Code Comparison

mall:

@Autowired
private UmsMemberService memberService;

@ApiOperation("获取验证码")
@GetMapping("/getAuthCode")
public CommonResult getAuthCode(@RequestParam String telephone) {
    return memberService.generateAuthCode(telephone);
}

xmall:

@Autowired
private UserService userService;

@RequestMapping(value = "/member/checkLogin",method = RequestMethod.GET)
@ResponseBody
public Result<Member> checkLogin(@RequestParam(defaultValue = "") String token){
    Member member = userService.getUserByToken(token);
    return new ResultUtil<Member>().setData(member);
}

Both projects use Spring Boot and similar annotation-based approaches. mall appears to have more detailed API documentation with Swagger annotations, while xmall uses a custom Result class for responses.

mall generally offers a more feature-rich and well-documented e-commerce solution, but may be overkill for simpler projects. xmall provides a lighter alternative with a focus on core e-commerce functionality, potentially easier to get started with for beginners or smaller-scale applications.

Pros of zheng

• More comprehensive and modular architecture, covering a wider range of functionalities
• Better documentation and detailed explanations for each module
• Larger community and more frequent updates

Cons of zheng

• Higher complexity, which may be overwhelming for beginners
• Steeper learning curve due to its extensive feature set
• Potentially more resource-intensive due to its comprehensive nature

Code Comparison

zheng:

@Service
@Transactional
@BaseService
public class UserServiceImpl extends BaseServiceImpl<UserMapper, User, UserExample> implements UserService {

    private static final Logger LOGGER = LoggerFactory.getLogger(UserServiceImpl.class);

    @Autowired
    UserMapper userMapper;

xmall:

@Service
public class UserServiceImpl implements UserService {

    @Autowired
    private TbUserMapper tbUserMapper;

    @Autowired
    private JedisClient jedisClient;

The code comparison shows that zheng uses a more structured approach with base classes and examples, while xmall has a simpler implementation. zheng also includes logging, which is not present in the xmall snippet.

Both projects are e-commerce platforms, but zheng offers a more extensive set of features and a modular design. xmall, on the other hand, provides a more straightforward implementation that may be easier for beginners to understand and customize. The choice between the two depends on the specific requirements of the project and the developer's experience level.

Pros of litemall

• Simpler architecture and easier to understand for beginners
• More focused on mobile e-commerce with a WeChat mini-program
• Actively maintained with recent updates

Cons of litemall

• Less comprehensive feature set compared to xmall
• Smaller community and fewer contributors
• Limited documentation and examples

Code Comparison

xmall (Java):

@RestController
@Api(tags = "Order Controller")
public class OrderController {
    @Autowired
    private OrderService orderService;

    @PostMapping("/create")
    public Result createOrder(@RequestBody Order order) {
        return orderService.createOrder(order);
    }
}

litemall (Java):

@RestController
@RequestMapping("/wx/order")
@Validated
public class WxOrderController {
    @Autowired
    private WxOrderService wxOrderService;

    @PostMapping("submit")
    public Object submit(@LoginUser Integer userId, @RequestBody WxOrderSubmitDTO dto) {
        return wxOrderService.submit(userId, dto);
    }
}

Both projects use Spring Boot for their backend, but litemall's code is more focused on WeChat integration, as seen in the WxOrderController class. xmall's code appears to be more generic and potentially more extensible for different types of e-commerce platforms.

Pros of newbee-mall

• More beginner-friendly with detailed documentation and setup instructions
• Actively maintained with frequent updates and bug fixes
• Includes a comprehensive admin dashboard for easy management

Cons of newbee-mall

• Less feature-rich compared to xmall's extensive functionality
• Smaller community and fewer third-party integrations
• Limited customization options for advanced users

Code Comparison

newbee-mall:

@Autowired
private NewBeeMallCategoryService newBeeMallCategoryService;

@GetMapping("/categories")
public Result<List<NewBeeMallIndexCategoryVO>> getCategories() {
    List<NewBeeMallIndexCategoryVO> categories = newBeeMallCategoryService.getCategoriesForIndex();
    return ResultGenerator.genSuccessResult(categories);
}

xmall:

@Autowired
private ContentService contentService;

@RequestMapping(value="/recommend",method= RequestMethod.GET)
public Result<List<PanelDto>> getRecommendGoods(@RequestParam(defaultValue = "1") int type){
    List<PanelDto> list=contentService.getRecommendGoods(type);
    return new ResultUtil<List<PanelDto>>().setData(list);
}

Both projects use Spring Boot and follow similar MVC patterns. newbee-mall focuses on simplicity and readability, while xmall offers more complex features and customization options.

Pros of paascloud-master

• More comprehensive microservices architecture, including service discovery and configuration management
• Better documentation and detailed deployment instructions
• Includes a front-end admin dashboard for easier management

Cons of paascloud-master

• Higher complexity, which may be overkill for smaller projects
• Steeper learning curve due to the more advanced architecture
• Less active community and fewer contributors compared to xmall

Code Comparison

paascloud-master:

@EnableEurekaClient
@EnableFeignClients
@EnableHystrixDashboard
@EnableCircuitBreaker
@SpringBootApplication
public class PaasCloudCoreApplication {
    public static void main(String[] args) {
        SpringApplication.run(PaasCloudCoreApplication.class, args);
    }
}

xmall:

@SpringBootApplication
@EnableDiscoveryClient
@EnableFeignClients
public class XmallApplication {
    public static void main(String[] args) {
        SpringApplication.run(XmallApplication.class, args);
    }
}

The code comparison shows that paascloud-master includes additional annotations for circuit breaking and hystrix dashboard, indicating a more robust microservices implementation. xmall has a simpler configuration, which may be easier to set up but offers fewer out-of-the-box features for distributed systems.

Pros of yudao-cloud

• More comprehensive microservices architecture, suitable for large-scale enterprise applications
• Extensive use of Spring Cloud components for better scalability and resilience
• Incorporates advanced features like distributed transactions and service governance

Cons of yudao-cloud

• Higher complexity and steeper learning curve compared to xmall
• Potentially overkill for smaller projects or simpler e-commerce applications
• Requires more resources and infrastructure to deploy and maintain

Code Comparison

yudao-cloud (using Spring Cloud):

@SpringBootApplication
@EnableDiscoveryClient
@EnableFeignClients
public class YudaoAdminServerApplication {
    public static void main(String[] args) {
        SpringApplication.run(YudaoAdminServerApplication.class, args);
    }
}

xmall (using Spring Boot):

@SpringBootApplication
public class XmallApplication {
    public static void main(String[] args) {
        SpringApplication.run(XmallApplication.class, args);
    }
}

The code comparison shows that yudao-cloud utilizes Spring Cloud annotations for service discovery and Feign clients, indicating its microservices-oriented architecture. In contrast, xmall uses a simpler Spring Boot setup, suitable for monolithic applications or smaller-scale projects.