Pros of Horizon

• Integrated library management system with version control
• Unified interface for schematic and PCB design
• Modern C++ codebase with GPU acceleration

Cons of Horizon

• Smaller user base and community support
• Less extensive component libraries
• Fewer third-party plugins and integrations

Code Comparison

Horizon (C++):

class Core {
public:
    Core(const std::string &config_filename);
    void run();
private:
    std::unique_ptr<class CorePrivate> priv;
};

KiCad (C++):

class PCB_EDIT_FRAME : public PCB_BASE_FRAME
{
public:
    PCB_EDIT_FRAME( KIWAY* aKiway, wxWindow* aParent );
    ~PCB_EDIT_FRAME();
    void OnCloseWindow( wxCloseEvent& Event ) override;
};

Both projects use C++ for their core functionality, but Horizon's codebase appears more modern and streamlined. KiCad's code reflects its longer history and broader feature set, with more complex class hierarchies. Horizon's design philosophy emphasizes a unified approach, while KiCad maintains separate modules for different aspects of PCB design.

Pros of LibrePCB

• Modern, clean codebase written in C++
• Unified library concept for all elements
• Built-in version control for libraries and projects

Cons of LibrePCB

• Smaller community and ecosystem compared to KiCad
• Fewer advanced features and specialized tools
• Limited third-party component libraries

Code Comparison

KiCad (C++):

void SCH_EDIT_FRAME::OnOpenLibraryViewer( wxCommandEvent& event )
{
    LIB_VIEW_FRAME* viewlibframe = LIB_VIEW_FRAME::ShowLibraryViewer( this );
    viewlibframe->Raise();
}

LibrePCB (C++):

void SchematicEditor::openLibraryManager() noexcept
{
    LibraryManager::instance().openLibraryManager(this);
}

Both projects use C++, but LibrePCB's codebase appears more modern and concise. KiCad's code shows its legacy, with longer function names and more verbose implementation. LibrePCB's code is more straightforward and follows contemporary C++ practices.

While KiCad has a larger community and more extensive features, LibrePCB offers a fresh approach with a unified library concept and built-in version control. However, LibrePCB's smaller ecosystem and fewer specialized tools may limit its appeal for complex projects.

Pros of Fritzing

• More beginner-friendly interface with visual representations of components
• Easier to create quick prototypes and breadboard layouts
• Includes a PCB fabrication service directly integrated into the software

Cons of Fritzing

• Less powerful and feature-rich for complex PCB design compared to KiCad
• Smaller component library and less frequent updates
• Limited schematic capture capabilities for advanced designs

Code Comparison

KiCad (C++):

void SCH_EDIT_FRAME::OnOpenPcbnew( wxCommandEvent& event )
{
    PROJECT* project = &Prj();
    wxFileName fn = Prj().AbsolutePath( m_CurrentSheet->GetScreen()->GetFileName() );
    fn.SetExt( PCB_FILE_EXT );
    wxString path = fn.GetFullPath();

Fritzing (C++/Qt):

void MainWindow::createZoomControls(SketchAreaWidget* parent) {
    ZoomControls * zoomControls = new ZoomControls(parent);
    connect(zoomControls, SIGNAL(zoomInSignal()), this, SLOT(zoomIn()));
    connect(zoomControls, SIGNAL(zoomOutSignal()), this, SLOT(zoomOut()));
    connect(zoomControls, SIGNAL(fitInWindowSignal()), this, SLOT(fitInWindow()));

Both projects use C++, with Fritzing heavily utilizing Qt framework. KiCad's codebase appears more complex, reflecting its more advanced features and capabilities.