Pros of go-multierror

• Simpler API with fewer methods, making it easier to learn and use
• Provides a Flatten() method to simplify nested error structures
• Includes a Prefix() method for adding context to errors

Cons of go-multierror

• Less performant than multierr for large numbers of errors
• Lacks advanced features like error filtering and custom formatting
• Does not support combining errors with non-error values

Code Comparison

multierr:

err1 := errors.New("error 1")
err2 := errors.New("error 2")
merr := multierr.Combine(err1, err2)

go-multierror:

var merr *multierror.Error
merr = multierror.Append(merr, errors.New("error 1"))
merr = multierror.Append(merr, errors.New("error 2"))

Both libraries provide similar functionality for combining multiple errors, but multierr offers a more concise API and additional features. go-multierror, on the other hand, provides a simpler approach with methods for flattening and prefixing errors. The choice between the two depends on specific project requirements, performance needs, and desired error handling capabilities.

Pros of errorx

• More comprehensive error handling with rich error types and hierarchies
• Built-in error tracing and stack trace support
• Provides error wrapping and unwrapping functionality

Cons of errorx

• More complex API, potentially steeper learning curve
• Larger codebase and dependency footprint
• May be overkill for simpler projects or use cases

Code Comparison

errorx:

err := errorx.Decorate(originalError, "additional context")
if errorx.IsOfType(err, MyErrorType) {
    // Handle specific error type
}

multierr:

err := multierr.Combine(err1, err2, err3)
if err != nil {
    // Handle combined errors
}

Summary

errorx offers a more feature-rich error handling solution with advanced capabilities like error hierarchies and tracing. It's well-suited for complex applications requiring detailed error management. However, its complexity may be unnecessary for simpler projects.

multierr focuses on combining multiple errors into a single error value, providing a straightforward way to handle multiple error cases. It's lightweight and easy to use but lacks some of the advanced features found in errorx.

Choose errorx for comprehensive error handling in larger projects, and multierr for simpler error combining needs in smaller applications or when a minimal dependency footprint is preferred.

Pros of eris

• Provides more detailed error wrapping with stack traces and additional context
• Offers error formatting and printing utilities for better error reporting
• Includes error cause comparison and type assertion helpers

Cons of eris

• More complex API compared to multierr's simpler approach
• Potentially higher memory usage due to stack trace capturing
• May introduce additional dependencies

Code Comparison

eris:

err := eris.New("base error")
wrappedErr := eris.Wrap(err, "wrapped error")
fmt.Println(eris.ToString(wrappedErr, true))

multierr:

err1 := errors.New("error 1")
err2 := errors.New("error 2")
combined := multierr.Combine(err1, err2)
fmt.Println(combined)

Summary

eris offers more advanced error handling features with stack traces and formatting options, while multierr focuses on combining multiple errors. eris provides a richer set of tools for error management but comes with increased complexity. multierr, on the other hand, offers a simpler API for combining errors without additional context. The choice between the two depends on the specific error handling requirements of your project.