Pros of termbox-go

• Simpler API, easier to get started for basic terminal applications
• Lightweight with minimal dependencies
• Cross-platform support (Windows, macOS, Linux)

Cons of termbox-go

• Limited built-in widgets and UI components
• Less feature-rich compared to termdash
• Lacks advanced layout management capabilities

Code Comparison

termbox-go:

err := termbox.Init()
if err != nil {
    panic(err)
}
defer termbox.Close()
termbox.SetOutputMode(termbox.Output256)

termdash:

t, err := tcell.New()
if err != nil {
    panic(err)
}
defer t.Close()
c, err := container.New(t, container.Border(linestyle.Light))
if err != nil {
    panic(err)
}

termdash provides a more structured approach with containers and widgets, while termbox-go offers a lower-level API for direct terminal manipulation. termdash is better suited for complex terminal UIs with multiple components, whereas termbox-go is ideal for simpler applications or when more control over the terminal is needed.

Pros of termui

• More mature project with a larger community and ecosystem
• Wider range of pre-built components and widgets
• Simpler API for basic use cases

Cons of termui

• Less flexible layout system compared to termdash
• Limited support for custom widgets and advanced customization
• Less frequent updates and maintenance

Code Comparison

termui example:

ui.NewPar("Hello World!")
ui.NewGauge()
ui.NewBarChart()

termdash example:

container.New(
    terminal,
    container.Border(linestyle.Light),
    container.BorderTitle("PRESS Q TO QUIT"),
    container.SplitVertical(
        container.Left(
            container.SplitHorizontal(
                container.Top(
                    container.Border(linestyle.Light),
                    container.BorderTitle("Bar Chart"),
                    container.PlaceWidget(barChart),
                ),
                container.Bottom(
                    container.Border(linestyle.Light),
                    container.BorderTitle("Text Box"),
                    container.PlaceWidget(textBox),
                ),
            ),
        ),
        container.Right(
            container.Border(linestyle.Light),
            container.BorderTitle("Gauge"),
            container.PlaceWidget(gauge),
        ),
    ),
)

The code comparison shows that termui has a simpler API for creating basic components, while termdash offers more control over layout and widget placement. termdash's approach allows for more complex and customizable layouts, but requires more code for setup.

Pros of tview

• Simpler API and easier to get started with
• More comprehensive widget set out-of-the-box
• Better documentation and examples

Cons of tview

• Less flexible layout system
• Fewer customization options for individual widgets
• Limited support for custom drawing and animations

Code Comparison

tview example:

app := tview.NewApplication()
box := tview.NewBox().SetBorder(true).SetTitle("Hello, world!")
if err := app.SetRoot(box, true).Run(); err != nil {
    panic(err)
}

termdash example:

t, err := tcell.New()
if err != nil {
    panic(err)
}
defer t.Close()

ctx, cancel := context.WithCancel(context.Background())
c, err := container.New(t, container.Border(linestyle.Light))
if err != nil {
    panic(err)
}

if err := termdash.Run(ctx, t, c, termdash.KeyboardSubscriber(quit)); err != nil {
    panic(err)
}

Both libraries offer powerful terminal UI capabilities, but tview is generally easier to use for simpler applications, while termdash provides more control and customization options for complex layouts and widgets.

Pros of tcell

• Lower-level library, offering more flexibility and control
• Wider terminal support, including Windows
• Potentially better performance for complex applications

Cons of tcell

• Requires more code to create user interfaces
• Steeper learning curve for beginners
• Less built-in functionality for creating dashboards and widgets

Code Comparison

termdash:

container, err := container.New(t, container.Border(linestyle.Light))
if err != nil {
    panic(err)
}

tcell:

s, err := tcell.NewScreen()
if err != nil {
    log.Fatalf("%+v", err)
}
if err := s.Init(); err != nil {
    log.Fatalf("%+v", err)
}

Summary

termdash is a higher-level library built on top of tcell, providing ready-to-use components for creating terminal dashboards. It offers a more user-friendly API but with less flexibility. tcell, on the other hand, is a lower-level library that provides direct control over terminal operations, offering more flexibility but requiring more code to create complex interfaces.

Choose termdash for quick dashboard creation with pre-built widgets, or tcell for more control and customization in terminal-based applications. Consider your project requirements and development experience when deciding between the two.

Pros of gocui

• Simpler API and easier to get started with for basic TUI applications
• Lightweight and minimal dependencies
• Better suited for smaller projects or quick prototypes

Cons of gocui

• Less feature-rich compared to termdash
• Limited built-in widgets and customization options
• Less active development and community support

Code Comparison

gocui example:

g, err := gocui.NewGui(gocui.OutputNormal)
if err != nil {
    log.Panicln(err)
}
defer g.Close()

g.SetManagerFunc(layout)

termdash example:

t, err := terminalapi.New(terminalapi.ColorMode(terminal.ColorMode256))
if err != nil {
    panic(err)
}
defer t.Close()

c, err := container.New(t, container.Border(linestyle.Light))
if err != nil {
    panic(err)
}

termdash offers more advanced features and customization options, while gocui provides a simpler API for basic TUI applications. termdash is better suited for complex, data-driven dashboards, while gocui is ideal for simpler, menu-driven interfaces. Choose based on your project's complexity and requirements.