raylib-go

Pros of raylib

• Written in C, offering better performance and lower-level control
• More comprehensive and mature library with a wider range of features
• Larger community and ecosystem, with more examples and resources available

Cons of raylib

• Requires C knowledge, which may be less accessible for some developers
• Potentially more complex setup and compilation process
• Less idiomatic for Go developers who prefer working with native Go code

Code Comparison

raylib (C):

#include "raylib.h"

int main(void)
{
    InitWindow(800, 450, "raylib [core] example - basic window");
    while (!WindowShouldClose())
    {
        BeginDrawing();
            ClearBackground(RAYWHITE);
            DrawText("Congrats! You created your first window!", 190, 200, 20, LIGHTGRAY);
        EndDrawing();
    }
    CloseWindow();
    return 0;
}

raylib-go (Go):

package main

import rl "github.com/gen2brain/raylib-go/raylib"

func main() {
    rl.InitWindow(800, 450, "raylib [core] example - basic window")
    for !rl.WindowShouldClose() {
        rl.BeginDrawing()
        rl.ClearBackground(rl.RayWhite)
        rl.DrawText("Congrats! You created your first window!", 190, 200, 20, rl.LightGray)
        rl.EndDrawing()
    }
    rl.CloseWindow()
}

Pros of glad

• Focused on OpenGL loading, providing a lightweight solution for graphics programming
• Supports multiple languages (C, C++, D, Nim, Pascal) for broader compatibility
• Allows fine-grained control over OpenGL function loading

Cons of glad

• Limited to OpenGL functionality, lacking the comprehensive features of a full game framework
• Requires more setup and boilerplate code for basic rendering tasks
• May need additional libraries for window management, input handling, and audio

Code Comparison

glad (OpenGL function loading):

if (!gladLoadGL()) {
    printf("Failed to initialize GLAD\n");
    return -1;
}

raylib-go (Window creation and rendering):

rl.InitWindow(800, 450, "raylib [core] example - basic window")
defer rl.CloseWindow()
for !rl.WindowShouldClose() {
    rl.BeginDrawing()
    rl.ClearBackground(rl.RayWhite)
    rl.EndDrawing()
}

Summary

glad is a specialized OpenGL loader library, while raylib-go is a comprehensive game development framework. glad offers more flexibility for low-level graphics programming across multiple languages, but requires additional setup. raylib-go provides a higher-level abstraction with built-in window management, input handling, and rendering utilities, making it easier to get started with game development in Go.

Pros of GLFW

• More mature and widely adopted in the industry
• Offers greater flexibility and lower-level control
• Extensive documentation and community support

Cons of GLFW

• Steeper learning curve for beginners
• Requires more boilerplate code for basic functionality
• Limited to window creation and input handling

Code Comparison

GLFW (C):

#include <GLFW/glfw3.h>

int main(void) {
    GLFWwindow* window = glfwCreateWindow(640, 480, "GLFW Window", NULL, NULL);
    while (!glfwWindowShouldClose(window)) {
        glfwSwapBuffers(window);
        glfwPollEvents();
    }
}

Raylib-go (Go):

package main

import rl "github.com/gen2brain/raylib-go/raylib"

func main() {
    rl.InitWindow(800, 450, "Raylib Window")
    for !rl.WindowShouldClose() {
        rl.BeginDrawing()
        rl.EndDrawing()
    }
}

GLFW focuses on window creation and input handling, while Raylib-go provides a higher-level API with built-in graphics functions. GLFW offers more control but requires additional libraries for graphics, while Raylib-go simplifies game development with an all-in-one solution.

Pros of ImGui

• Lightweight and easy to integrate into existing projects
• Highly customizable with a wide range of UI elements
• Supports multiple backends (OpenGL, DirectX, Vulkan, etc.)

Cons of ImGui

• Requires more manual setup and rendering code
• Less beginner-friendly compared to Raylib's simplicity
• Limited built-in support for advanced graphics features

Code Comparison

ImGui (C++):

ImGui::Begin("Hello, ImGui!");
ImGui::Text("This is a simple window.");
if (ImGui::Button("Click me!"))
    // Handle button click
ImGui::End();

Raylib-go (Go):

rl.BeginDrawing()
rl.ClearBackground(rl.RayWhite)
rl.DrawText("Hello, Raylib!", 190, 200, 20, rl.LightGray)
rl.EndDrawing()

Key Differences

• ImGui focuses on immediate mode GUI, while Raylib is a more comprehensive game development framework
• Raylib-go provides Go bindings for Raylib, making it easier to use in Go projects
• ImGui requires more manual rendering and event handling, whereas Raylib abstracts much of this complexity

Use Cases

• ImGui: Best for adding debug interfaces or tools to existing applications
• Raylib-go: Ideal for creating 2D and 3D games or multimedia applications in Go

Both libraries have their strengths, and the choice depends on the specific project requirements and the developer's preferred language and workflow.

Pros of Hazel

• More comprehensive game engine with built-in scene management and entity-component system
• Designed for modern C++ development, leveraging newer language features
• Includes a robust event system and input handling

Cons of Hazel

• Steeper learning curve due to its more complex architecture
• Less cross-platform support compared to raylib-go
• Still in development, with potential for breaking changes

Code Comparison

Hazel (C++):

#include "Hazel.h"

class ExampleLayer : public Hazel::Layer
{
public:
    void OnUpdate() override
    {
        HZ_INFO("ExampleLayer::Update");
    }
};

raylib-go (Go):

package main

import "github.com/gen2brain/raylib-go/raylib"

func main() {
    rl.InitWindow(800, 450, "raylib [core] example - basic window")
    defer rl.CloseWindow()

    for !rl.WindowShouldClose() {
        rl.BeginDrawing()
        rl.ClearBackground(rl.RayWhite)
        rl.DrawText("Congrats! You created your first window!", 190, 200, 20, rl.LightGray)
        rl.EndDrawing()
    }
}

The code comparison shows that Hazel uses a more object-oriented approach with layers and events, while raylib-go provides a simpler, more procedural API for game development.

Pros of sokol

• Multi-language support: C, C++, Zig, Nim, and more
• Modular design with separate headers for different functionalities
• Lightweight and minimal dependencies

Cons of sokol

• Less comprehensive than raylib-go for game development
• Steeper learning curve for beginners
• Limited built-in high-level game development features

Code Comparison

raylib-go:

package main

import "github.com/gen2brain/raylib-go/raylib"

func main() {
    rl.InitWindow(800, 450, "raylib [core] example - basic window")
    defer rl.CloseWindow()

    for !rl.WindowShouldClose() {
        rl.BeginDrawing()
        rl.ClearBackground(rl.RayWhite)
        rl.DrawText("Congrats! You created your first window!", 190, 200, 20, rl.LightGray)
        rl.EndDrawing()
    }
}

sokol:

#include "sokol_app.h"
#include "sokol_gfx.h"

sapp_desc sokol_main(int argc, char* argv[]) {
    return (sapp_desc){
        .init_cb = init,
        .frame_cb = frame,
        .cleanup_cb = cleanup,
        .width = 800,
        .height = 450,
        .window_title = "sokol example",
    };
}