Pros of swagger-typescript-api

• Generates full API client with methods, not just types
• Supports multiple output formats (modular, single file, etc.)
• Includes runtime request/response validation

Cons of swagger-typescript-api

• More complex setup and configuration
• May generate unnecessary code for simple use cases
• Less flexible for custom type generation

Code Comparison

swagger-typescript-api generated client:

export class Api<SecurityDataType = unknown> {
  public readonly request: HttpClient<SecurityDataType>;

  constructor(config?: Partial<ApiConfig<SecurityDataType>>) {
    this.request = new HttpClient<SecurityDataType>(config);
  }

  // ... generated API methods
}

openapi-typescript generated types:

export interface paths {
  "/users": {
    get: {
      responses: {
        200: {
          content: {
            "application/json": {
              schema: components["schemas"]["UserList"];
            };
          };
        };
      };
    };
  };
}

swagger-typescript-api focuses on generating a full API client with methods for each endpoint, while openapi-typescript generates type definitions that can be used with any HTTP client. The former provides a more complete solution out-of-the-box, while the latter offers more flexibility in implementation.

Pros of openapi-typescript

• Generates TypeScript types from OpenAPI schemas
• Supports OpenAPI 3.0 and 3.1 specifications
• Provides CLI and programmatic usage options

Cons of openapi-typescript

• Limited customization options for generated types
• May not handle complex schema structures as effectively
• Requires manual updates when API changes

Code Comparison

openapi-typescript:

import { OpenAPIV3 } from 'openapi-types';
import { parse } from 'openapi-typescript';

const schema: OpenAPIV3.Document = {
  // OpenAPI schema definition
};

const types = parse(schema);

Additional Notes

Both repositories appear to be the same project, as openapi-typescript is the main repository for the openapi-typescript package. The comparison provided above is based on the features and characteristics of the openapi-typescript project itself, rather than comparing two distinct repositories.

openapi-typescript is a popular tool for generating TypeScript types from OpenAPI schemas, offering developers a way to maintain type safety when working with API definitions. It supports both OpenAPI 3.0 and 3.1 specifications and can be used via CLI or programmatically in Node.js projects.

While it provides valuable functionality, users should be aware of its limitations in handling complex schema structures and the need for manual updates when API definitions change. Despite these considerations, openapi-typescript remains a useful tool for many developers working with OpenAPI specifications in TypeScript projects.

Pros of openapi-typescript

• Generates TypeScript types from OpenAPI schemas
• Supports OpenAPI 3.0 and 3.1 specifications
• Provides CLI and programmatic usage options

Cons of openapi-typescript

• Limited customization options for generated types
• May not handle complex schema structures as effectively
• Requires manual updates when API changes

Code Comparison

openapi-typescript:

import { OpenAPIV3 } from 'openapi-types';
import { parse } from 'openapi-typescript';

const schema: OpenAPIV3.Document = {
  // OpenAPI schema definition
};

const types = parse(schema);

Additional Notes

Both repositories appear to be the same project, as openapi-typescript is the main repository for the openapi-typescript package. The comparison provided above is based on the features and characteristics of the openapi-typescript project itself, rather than comparing two distinct repositories.

openapi-typescript is a popular tool for generating TypeScript types from OpenAPI schemas, offering developers a way to maintain type safety when working with API definitions. It supports both OpenAPI 3.0 and 3.1 specifications and can be used via CLI or programmatically in Node.js projects.

While it provides valuable functionality, users should be aware of its limitations in handling complex schema structures and the need for manual updates when API definitions change. Despite these considerations, openapi-typescript remains a useful tool for many developers working with OpenAPI specifications in TypeScript projects.

Pros of openapi-typescript-codegen

• Generates complete TypeScript client code, including API classes and models
• Supports custom templates for more flexible code generation
• Includes built-in request handling and error management

Cons of openapi-typescript-codegen

• May generate more code than necessary for simple use cases
• Requires additional setup and configuration for custom templates
• Generated code might be less flexible for manual modifications

Code Comparison

openapi-typescript:

export interface Pet {
  id?: number;
  name: string;
  tag?: string;
}

openapi-typescript-codegen:

export class Pet {
  id?: number;
  name: string;
  tag?: string;

  constructor(data?: Pet) {
    if (data) {
      this.id = data.id;
      this.name = data.name;
      this.tag = data.tag;
    }
  }
}

The openapi-typescript-codegen example shows a class with a constructor, while openapi-typescript generates a simpler interface. The class-based approach provides more functionality but may be overkill for basic use cases.

Pros of NSwag

• Supports multiple programming languages (C#, TypeScript, JavaScript)
• Offers code generation for both client and server-side
• Provides a user interface for API documentation and testing

Cons of NSwag

• Steeper learning curve due to more extensive features
• May generate more complex code structures
• Requires additional setup for non-.NET environments

Code Comparison

NSwag (C# client generation):

var document = await OpenApiDocument.FromUrlAsync("https://api.example.com/swagger/v1/swagger.json");
var settings = new CSharpClientGeneratorSettings { ... };
var generator = new CSharpClientGenerator(document, settings);
var code = generator.GenerateFile();

openapi-typescript (TypeScript type generation):

import { parse } from 'openapi-typescript';
const schema = await parse('https://api.example.com/swagger/v1/swagger.json');

Key Differences

• NSwag is a more comprehensive toolkit for OpenAPI, while openapi-typescript focuses specifically on TypeScript type generation
• openapi-typescript is lighter and easier to integrate into TypeScript projects
• NSwag offers more customization options but requires more configuration
• openapi-typescript generates types only, while NSwag can generate full client libraries

Both tools are valuable for working with OpenAPI specifications, but they cater to different use cases and development environments.

Pros of openapi-generator

• Supports multiple programming languages and frameworks
• Generates complete client libraries and server stubs
• Offers extensive customization options and templates

Cons of openapi-generator

• Larger and more complex, potentially slower for simple use cases
• Steeper learning curve due to its comprehensive feature set
• May generate unnecessary boilerplate code for smaller projects

Code comparison

openapi-generator (Java client):

OkHttpClient client = new OkHttpClient();
ApiClient apiClient = new ApiClient(client);
PetApi petApi = new PetApi(apiClient);
Pet pet = petApi.getPetById(1L);

openapi-typescript:

import { paths } from './generated';

type PetResponse = paths['/pet/{petId}']['get']['responses']['200']['content']['application/json'];
const pet: PetResponse = await fetch('/pet/1').then(res => res.json());

Key differences

• openapi-generator provides full client libraries, while openapi-typescript focuses on type generation
• openapi-typescript offers a more lightweight approach, suitable for TypeScript projects
• openapi-generator supports a wider range of languages and use cases
• openapi-typescript integrates more seamlessly with existing TypeScript codebases
• openapi-generator may be preferred for larger, multi-language projects, while openapi-typescript is ideal for TypeScript-centric development