Pros of gnet

• Higher performance in some benchmarks, especially for high-concurrency scenarios
• More flexible event-driven model with customizable event handlers
• Built-in load balancing and graceful shutdown features

Cons of gnet

• Less actively maintained compared to netpoll (fewer recent updates)
• More complex API, which may have a steeper learning curve
• Limited documentation and examples compared to netpoll

Code Comparison

gnet

type Server struct {
    *gnet.EventServer
}

func (s *Server) React(frame []byte, c gnet.Conn) (out []byte, action gnet.Action) {
    // Handle incoming data
    return frame, gnet.None
}

netpoll

func onRequest(ctx context.Context, connection netpoll.Connection) error {
    reader := connection.Reader()
    writer := connection.Writer()
    // Handle incoming data
    return nil
}

Both libraries provide efficient network I/O operations, but gnet offers a more event-driven approach with customizable handlers, while netpoll focuses on simplicity and ease of use. gnet may have an edge in high-concurrency scenarios, but netpoll is more actively maintained and has better documentation. The choice between the two depends on specific project requirements and developer preferences.

Pros of fasthttp

• Higher performance and lower memory usage for HTTP servers and clients
• Optimized for high-load scenarios with minimal memory allocations
• Extensive feature set including support for HTTP/1.1 and WebSockets

Cons of fasthttp

• Less compatibility with the standard net/http package
• Steeper learning curve due to its unique API design
• May require more manual memory management in some cases

Code Comparison

fasthttp

func requestHandler(ctx *fasthttp.RequestCtx) {
    fmt.Fprintf(ctx, "Hello, world!")
}
fasthttp.ListenAndServe(":8080", requestHandler)

netpoll

func main() {
    eventLoop, _ := netpoll.NewEventLoop(handler)
    eventLoop.Serve(":8080")
}

Key Differences

• netpoll focuses on providing a high-performance network I/O framework, while fasthttp is specifically designed for HTTP
• netpoll offers more flexibility for various network protocols, whereas fasthttp is optimized for HTTP
• fasthttp provides a complete HTTP implementation, while netpoll requires additional layers for HTTP handling

Both libraries aim to improve performance over standard Go networking, but they approach the problem from different angles. fasthttp is more specialized for HTTP, while netpoll offers a broader network programming foundation.

Pros of nbio

• Simpler API and easier to use for basic networking tasks
• Better support for WebSocket connections out of the box
• More flexible configuration options for fine-tuning performance

Cons of nbio

• Less optimized for high-performance scenarios compared to netpoll
• Fewer advanced features for complex networking requirements
• Smaller community and ecosystem around the project

Code Comparison

nbio:

engine := nbio.NewEngine(nbio.Config{
    Network: "tcp",
    Addr:    ":8080",
})
engine.OnData(func(c *nbio.Conn, data []byte) {
    c.Write(data)
})

netpoll:

eventLoop, _ := netpoll.NewEventLoop(
    netpoll.WithOnPrepare(onPrepare),
    netpoll.WithOnConnect(onConnect),
    netpoll.WithOnRequest(onRequest),
)
eventLoop.Serve(listener)

Both nbio and netpoll are Go libraries for building high-performance network applications. nbio offers a simpler API and better WebSocket support, making it easier to use for basic networking tasks. However, netpoll is more optimized for high-performance scenarios and provides more advanced features for complex networking requirements. The code comparison shows that nbio has a more straightforward setup process, while netpoll offers more granular control over event handling.

Pros of evio

• Simpler API and easier to use for basic networking tasks
• Supports both TCP and UDP protocols out of the box
• Includes built-in load balancing capabilities

Cons of evio

• Less optimized for high-performance scenarios compared to netpoll
• Limited customization options for advanced use cases
• Lacks some of the more advanced features found in netpoll

Code Comparison

evio example:

func main() {
    var events evio.Events
    events.Data = func(c evio.Conn, in []byte) (out []byte, action evio.Action) {
        out = in
        return
    }
    if err := evio.Serve(events, "tcp://localhost:5000"); err != nil {
        panic(err)
    }
}

netpoll example:

func main() {
    eventLoop, _ := netpoll.NewEventLoop(
        func(ctx context.Context, connection netpoll.Connection) error {
            _, err := connection.Write([]byte("Hello, World!"))
            return err
        },
    )
    _ = eventLoop.Serve("tcp://localhost:8888")
}

Both libraries provide event-driven networking capabilities, but netpoll offers more advanced features and optimizations for high-performance scenarios. evio has a simpler API and is easier to use for basic tasks, while netpoll provides more customization options and is better suited for complex, high-throughput applications.