Pros of amp

• Lightweight and focused on asynchronous programming
• Active development with frequent updates and releases
• Extensive documentation and examples

Cons of amp

• Less comprehensive than a full framework
• Steeper learning curve for developers new to asynchronous programming
• Limited built-in features compared to full-stack frameworks

Code Comparison

amp:

$promise = Amp\call(function () {
    $response = yield Amp\Http\Client\HttpClientBuilder::buildDefault()
        ->request('https://example.com');
    return yield $response->getBody()->buffer();
});

framework:

$client = $container->make('http.client');
$response = $client->get('https://example.com');
$body = $response->getBody();

Summary

amp is a lightweight library focused on asynchronous programming, offering active development and extensive documentation. However, it may have a steeper learning curve and fewer built-in features compared to framework. framework provides a more comprehensive solution but may be less flexible for specific asynchronous tasks. The code comparison shows amp's use of promises and yields for asynchronous operations, while framework uses a more traditional synchronous approach.

Pros of ReactPHP

• More mature and widely adopted project with a larger community
• Offers a broader ecosystem of components for various async operations
• Better documentation and more extensive examples available

Cons of ReactPHP

• Steeper learning curve for developers new to asynchronous programming
• Requires more manual configuration and setup compared to Kraken's out-of-the-box approach
• Less opinionated, which may lead to inconsistencies in application structure

Code Comparison

ReactPHP example:

$loop = React\EventLoop\Factory::create();
$socket = new React\Socket\Server('127.0.0.1:8080', $loop);
$socket->on('connection', function (React\Socket\ConnectionInterface $conn) {
    $conn->write("Hello World!\n");
});
$loop->run();

Kraken example:

$loop = Loop::create();
$server = new Server(8080);
$server->onConnection(function(Connection $conn) {
    $conn->send("Hello World!\n");
});
$loop->run();

Both frameworks provide similar functionality for creating a simple server, but Kraken's API is slightly more concise and intuitive. ReactPHP offers more flexibility in configuration, while Kraken provides a more streamlined approach with its pre-configured components.

Pros of Swoole

• Higher performance due to its C-based implementation
• Built-in support for WebSockets, HTTP server, and asynchronous I/O
• Extensive documentation and active community support

Cons of Swoole

• Steeper learning curve for PHP developers unfamiliar with C extensions
• Requires compilation and installation of the extension
• May not be compatible with all PHP frameworks and libraries

Code Comparison

Swoole example:

$server = new Swoole\HTTP\Server('127.0.0.1', 9501);

$server->on('request', function ($request, $response) {
    $response->end('<h1>Hello World</h1>');
});

$server->start();

Kraken example:

$loop = Loop::create();
$server = new Server($loop);

$server->on('request', function ($request, $response) {
    $response->end('<h1>Hello World</h1>');
});

$server->listen(9501);
$loop->run();

Both examples create a simple HTTP server, but Swoole's implementation is more concise and doesn't require an external event loop. Kraken uses a more traditional PHP approach, which may be more familiar to some developers but potentially less performant.

Pros of Event

• Lightweight and focused solely on event handling
• Easier to integrate into existing projects due to its simplicity
• More frequent updates and active maintenance

Cons of Event

• Limited scope compared to Framework's comprehensive features
• Lacks built-in asynchronous processing capabilities
• May require additional libraries for complex event-driven architectures

Code Comparison

Event:

$emitter = new League\Event\Emitter;
$emitter->addListener('user.created', function (UserCreatedEvent $event) {
    // Handle user creation
});
$emitter->emit(new UserCreatedEvent($user));

Framework:

$loop = new Kraken\Loop\Model\StreamSelectLoop;
$loop->addPeriodicTimer(0.1, function () {
    // Perform periodic task
});
$loop->run();

Summary

Event is a focused library for event handling, making it easier to integrate into existing projects. However, it lacks the comprehensive features and asynchronous capabilities of Framework. Event is better suited for simpler event-driven applications, while Framework offers a more robust solution for complex, asynchronous systems. The choice between the two depends on the specific requirements of your project and the level of complexity you need to handle.

Pros of Icicle

• Lightweight and focused on asynchronous programming
• Simpler learning curve for developers familiar with PHP
• Active development and community support

Cons of Icicle

• Less comprehensive feature set compared to Kraken
• May require additional libraries for certain functionalities
• Smaller ecosystem and fewer extensions

Code Comparison

Icicle example:

$socket = yield Socket\connect('example.com', 80);
yield $socket->write("GET / HTTP/1.0\r\nHost: example.com\r\n\r\n");
$response = yield $socket->read();

Kraken example:

$loop = $container->make('Kraken\Loop\LoopInterface');
$loop->onTick(function() {
    echo "Tick!\n";
});
$loop->start();

Summary

Icicle is a lightweight, asynchronous PHP framework focused on simplicity and ease of use. It's well-suited for developers looking to implement asynchronous programming in PHP without a steep learning curve. However, it may lack some of the more advanced features and comprehensive ecosystem found in Kraken.

Kraken, on the other hand, offers a more robust and feature-rich environment for building complex, distributed applications. It provides a wider range of tools and abstractions but may require more time to master fully.

The choice between the two depends on the specific project requirements, team expertise, and desired level of abstraction and features.