Pros of monkeytype

• Identical repositories, so no distinct advantages
• Both offer the same features and functionality
• Equal in terms of code quality and project structure

Cons of monkeytype

• No unique disadvantages compared to the other repository
• Both have the same limitations or potential issues
• Identical in terms of any drawbacks or areas for improvement

Code Comparison

As these are the same repository, there is no code difference to compare. Both repositories would contain identical code structures, such as:

export function updateTestStats(testStats) {
  $("#testModesNotice").addClass("hidden");
  if (testStats == undefined) {
    $("#testModesNotice").removeClass("hidden");
    return;
  }
  // ... (rest of the function)
}

This code snippet would be present in both repositories, handling the update of test statistics in the Monkeytype application.

Pros of gnirehtet

• Focuses on reverse tethering for Android devices, providing a unique networking solution
• Supports both Windows and Linux platforms for the server component
• Offers a command-line interface for advanced users and scripting capabilities

Cons of gnirehtet

• More complex setup process compared to monkeytype's straightforward web-based approach
• Limited to Android devices, whereas monkeytype is accessible on any device with a web browser
• Requires root access on Android devices for some features, potentially limiting user base

Code Comparison

gnirehtet (Rust):

pub fn relay(tcp_client: TcpStream, selector: &mut Selector) -> io::Result<()> {
    let stream = TcpStream::connect(LOCALHOST_IPV4)?;
    relay_socket(tcp_client, stream, selector)
}

monkeytype (JavaScript):

export function updateTestModesNotice() {
  if (testActive) return;
  let anim = false;
  if ($('#testModesNotice').hasClass('hidden')) anim = true;
  $('#testModesNotice').removeClass('hidden');
  if (anim) $('#testModesNotice').css('opacity', 0).animate({ opacity: 1 }, 125);
}

This comparison highlights the different focus areas and implementation languages of the two projects, with gnirehtet using Rust for networking tasks and monkeytype using JavaScript for web-based functionality.

Pros of monkeytype

• Identical repositories, so no distinct advantages
• Both offer the same features and functionality
• Equal in terms of code quality and project structure

Cons of monkeytype

• No unique disadvantages compared to the other repository
• Both have the same limitations or potential issues
• Identical in terms of any drawbacks or areas for improvement

Code Comparison

As these are the same repository, there is no code difference to compare. Both repositories would contain identical code structures, such as:

export function updateTestStats(testStats) {
  $("#testModesNotice").addClass("hidden");
  if (testStats == undefined) {
    $("#testModesNotice").removeClass("hidden");
    return;
  }
  // ... (rest of the function)
}

This code snippet would be present in both repositories, handling the update of test statistics in the Monkeytype application.