wtf

Pros of gotop

• Lightweight and focused solely on system monitoring
• Simpler interface, easier to understand at a glance
• Lower resource usage due to its focused functionality

Cons of gotop

• Limited to system monitoring, lacks the versatility of WTF
• Fewer customization options and modules
• Less active development and community support

Code Comparison

gotop:

func (p *Proc) update() error {
    cmd := exec.Command("ps", "-axo", "pid,comm,pcpu,pmem,args")
    out, err := cmd.Output()
    if err != nil {
        return err
    }
    // ... (parsing logic)
}

WTF:

func (widget *Widget) Refresh() {
    widget.display()
}

func (widget *Widget) display() {
    widget.Redraw(widget.content)
}

gotop focuses on efficient system data collection, while WTF emphasizes modularity and display flexibility. gotop's code directly interacts with system commands, whereas WTF's structure allows for diverse data sources and display methods.

Pros of lazygit

• Focused specifically on Git operations, providing a more streamlined and specialized interface for Git users
• Offers interactive staging, allowing users to easily select and stage specific parts of files
• Provides a visual representation of Git branches and commit history, making it easier to understand repository structure

Cons of lazygit

• Limited to Git functionality, lacking the broader system monitoring capabilities of WTF
• May have a steeper learning curve for users not familiar with Git concepts
• Doesn't offer customizable dashboard layouts or widgets for non-Git related information

Code Comparison

WTF:

cfg := config.NewConfig()
app := tview.NewApplication()
pages := tview.NewPages()

wtf.DisplayMode = cfg.UString("wtf.displayMode", "grid")
wtf.OpenFileUtil = cfg.UString("wtf.openFileUtil", "open")

lazygit:

type App struct {
    closers []io.Closer
    Config  config.AppConfig
    OSCommand *commands.OSCommand
    GitCommand *commands.GitCommand
    Gui        *gui.Gui
}

Both projects use Go and implement terminal-based user interfaces, but WTF focuses on a modular dashboard system, while lazygit specializes in Git operations with a more Git-centric structure.

Pros of termui

• More flexible and customizable for building terminal UIs
• Lower-level library, offering finer control over UI components
• Suitable for a wider range of terminal-based applications

Cons of termui

• Requires more coding effort to create a functional dashboard
• Less out-of-the-box functionality for system monitoring
• Steeper learning curve for beginners

Code Comparison

WTF:

wtf.Run(func() {
    w := wtf.New(config)
    w.Run()
})

termui:

ui.Init()
defer ui.Close()

p := widgets.NewParagraph()
p.Text = "Hello World!"
ui.Render(p)

Summary

WTF is a pre-built personal dashboard for your terminal, offering a quick setup for system monitoring and information display. It's ideal for users who want a ready-to-use solution with minimal configuration.

termui, on the other hand, is a library for building custom terminal user interfaces. It provides more flexibility and control, making it suitable for developers who want to create tailored terminal applications beyond just dashboards.

While WTF offers convenience and immediate functionality, termui gives developers the tools to build more diverse and specialized terminal UIs, albeit with a higher initial investment of time and effort.

Pros of s-tui

• Focused specifically on system monitoring and stress testing
• Lightweight and runs in the terminal, ideal for servers without GUI
• Real-time graphs for CPU frequency, utilization, temperature, and power

Cons of s-tui

• Limited to system monitoring, lacks broader functionality
• Less customizable and extensible compared to WTF
• Fewer integrations with external services and data sources

Code Comparison

s-tui (Python):

def get_cpu_freq(self):
    cpu_freq = psutil.cpu_freq()
    return cpu_freq.current if cpu_freq else None

WTF (Go):

func (widget *Widget) Refresh() {
    widget.Data = wtf.NewTextWidget(widget.CommonSettings(), widget.View)
    widget.Data.Refresh()
}

Summary

s-tui is a specialized tool for system monitoring and stress testing, offering real-time graphs in the terminal. It's lightweight and ideal for server environments. However, it lacks the broader functionality and customization options of WTF.

WTF is a more comprehensive personal information dashboard with various modules and integrations. It offers greater flexibility and extensibility but may be overkill for simple system monitoring tasks.

The choice between the two depends on specific needs: s-tui for focused system monitoring, WTF for a more versatile information dashboard.

Pros of btop

• More focused on system monitoring and resource usage
• Offers a visually appealing and customizable interface
• Provides real-time updates and detailed process information

Cons of btop

• Limited to system monitoring functionality
• Less extensible compared to WTF's modular approach
• May consume more system resources due to its graphical nature

Code Comparison

btop (C++):

void Draw::draw_clock(int x, int y, int width, int height) {
    auto now = std::chrono::system_clock::now();
    auto time = std::chrono::system_clock::to_time_t(now);
    auto local = std::localtime(&time);
    // ... (drawing logic)
}

WTF (Go):

func (widget *Widget) Refresh() {
    widget.Time = time.Now().Local()
    widget.Date = widget.Time.Format(widget.dateFormat)
    widget.TimeStr = widget.Time.Format(widget.timeFormat)
}

Summary

btop is a resource-intensive system monitor with a rich graphical interface, while WTF is a more versatile, modular dashboard for various information sources. btop excels in detailed system monitoring, whereas WTF offers greater extensibility for different types of data display. The code snippets highlight their different approaches: btop focuses on drawing a clock, while WTF updates time-related information in a more data-centric manner.

Pros of Glances

• Cross-platform support (Linux, macOS, Windows)
• More comprehensive system monitoring, including network, disk I/O, and processes
• Supports both CLI and web-based interfaces

Cons of Glances

• Less customizable dashboard layout
• Focused primarily on system monitoring, lacking integration with external services
• Steeper learning curve for configuration and customization

Code Comparison

Glances configuration (glances.conf):

[cpu]
careful=50
warning=70
critical=90

[memory]
careful=50
warning=70
critical=90

WTF configuration (config.yml):

wtf:
  colors:
    border:
      focusable: darkslateblue
      focused: orange
      normal: gray
  grid:
    columns: [40, 40]
    rows: [13, 13, 4]

Summary

Glances is a more comprehensive system monitoring tool with cross-platform support, while WTF offers a highly customizable dashboard for various information sources. Glances excels in detailed system metrics, whereas WTF provides a broader range of integrations with external services. The choice between the two depends on whether you prioritize in-depth system monitoring or a customizable information dashboard.