FreeCAD

Pros of OpenSCAD

• Text-based parametric modeling allows for precise control and version control
• Lightweight and runs well on less powerful hardware
• Excellent for creating programmatic, mathematical designs

Cons of OpenSCAD

• Steeper learning curve for users without programming experience
• Limited GUI and interactive modeling capabilities
• Lacks advanced features like assembly modeling and constraints

Code Comparison

OpenSCAD:

module gear(teeth = 20, radius = 5) {
    circle(r = radius);
    for (i = [0:teeth-1]) {
        rotate(i * 360 / teeth) translate([radius, 0, 0]) square([2, 1]);
    }
}
gear();

FreeCAD (Python console):

import Part
from FreeCAD import Base

def create_gear(teeth=20, radius=5):
    gear = Part.makeCircle(radius)
    for i in range(teeth):
        angle = i * 360 / teeth
        tooth = Part.makeBox(2, 1, 1).translate(Base.Vector(radius, 0, 0))
        tooth.rotate(Base.Vector(0,0,0), Base.Vector(0,0,1), angle)
        gear = gear.fuse(tooth)
    return gear

Part.show(create_gear())

Pros of KiCad

• Specialized for electronic design automation (EDA) and PCB layout
• Extensive library of electronic components and footprints
• Active community with frequent updates and improvements

Cons of KiCad

• Limited to electronic design, not suitable for general 3D modeling
• Steeper learning curve for non-electronics professionals
• Less flexibility in custom component creation compared to FreeCAD

Code Comparison

KiCad (C++):

void SCH_EDIT_FRAME::OnOpenPCBEditor( wxCommandEvent& event )
{
    wxFileName fn( Prj().GetProjectFullName() );
    fn.SetExt( KiCadPcbFileExtension );
    wxString fullPath = fn.GetFullPath();
    KIWAY_PLAYER* frame = Kiway().Player( FRAME_PCB, true );
    frame->Show( true );
    frame->Raise();
}

FreeCAD (Python):

def makeBox(length, width, height):
    box = Part.makeBox(length, width, height)
    doc = FreeCAD.activeDocument()
    obj = doc.addObject("Part::Feature", "Box")
    obj.Shape = box
    doc.recompute()
    return obj

Pros of LibreCAD

• Lightweight and faster for 2D drafting tasks
• Simpler interface, easier to learn for beginners
• Better compatibility with older hardware

Cons of LibreCAD

• Limited to 2D drafting, no 3D modeling capabilities
• Fewer advanced features compared to FreeCAD
• Smaller community and fewer extensions/plugins

Code Comparison

LibreCAD (C++):

void RS_ActionDrawLine::trigger() {
    RS_Line* line = new RS_Line(container, *data);
    line->setLayerToActive();
    line->setPenToActive();
    container->addEntity(line);
}

FreeCAD (Python):

def makeBox(length, width, height):
    box = Part.makeBox(length, width, height)
    doc = FreeCAD.activeDocument()
    obj = doc.addObject("Part::Feature", "Box")
    obj.Shape = box
    doc.recompute()

LibreCAD focuses on 2D drafting with a C++ codebase, while FreeCAD offers more comprehensive 3D modeling capabilities using Python. LibreCAD's code is more low-level and performance-oriented, whereas FreeCAD's Python code is more accessible and easier to extend. FreeCAD provides a more powerful and flexible platform for complex designs, but LibreCAD excels in simplicity and efficiency for 2D work.

Pros of SolveSpace

• Lightweight and fast, with a smaller installation footprint
• Simpler interface, potentially easier for beginners to learn
• Focuses on constraint-based sketching and 3D modeling

Cons of SolveSpace

• Less feature-rich compared to FreeCAD's extensive toolset
• Smaller community and fewer extensions/plugins available
• Limited support for complex assemblies and advanced engineering tasks

Code Comparison

Both projects are primarily written in C++, but their codebases differ in structure and organization.

SolveSpace:

void SolveSpaceUI::MenuFile(int id) {
    switch(id) {
        case GraphicsWindow::MNU_NEW:
            NewFile();
            break;
        case GraphicsWindow::MNU_OPEN:
            OpenFile();
            break;
        // ...
    }
}

FreeCAD:

void Gui::Command::doCommand(DoCmd_Type eType, const char* sCmd, ...) {
    va_list ap;
    va_start(ap, sCmd);
    QString str;
    str.vsprintf(sCmd, ap);
    va_end(ap);
    // ...
}

SolveSpace's codebase is more compact and focused, while FreeCAD's is more extensive and modular, reflecting their different scopes and feature sets.

Pros of Synfig

• Specialized for 2D vector animation, offering a more focused toolset
• Lighter weight and potentially easier to learn for animation-specific tasks
• Cross-platform compatibility (Windows, macOS, Linux)

Cons of Synfig

• Limited to 2D design and animation, lacking 3D modeling capabilities
• Smaller community and fewer resources compared to FreeCAD
• Less frequent updates and potentially slower development cycle

Code Comparison

FreeCAD (Python):

import FreeCAD as App
import Part

box = Part.makeBox(10, 10, 10)
doc = App.newDocument()
Part.show(box)

Synfig (XML-based format):

<canvas version="1.0" width="480" height="270" xres="2834.645752" yres="2834.645752" view-box="-4.000000 2.250000 4.000000 -2.250000">
  <layer type="group" desc="Layer 1">
    <param name="z_depth">0.0000000000</param>
    <param name="amount">1.0000000000</param>
  </layer>
</canvas>

The code examples showcase the different approaches: FreeCAD uses Python for 3D modeling, while Synfig employs an XML-based format for 2D animation projects.