Gluegun Vs Oclif

• comparands: Oclif Gluegun

chatgpt

Let's compare Gluegun and Oclif for modular CLI development:

Gluegun:

Gluegun is a toolkit for building CLI applications in JavaScript or TypeScript. It's designed to be very flexible, allowing developers to build rich, modular, and interactive CLI tools. Here's what sets Gluegun apart:

Key Features of Gluegun:

1. Modular and Pluggable:

   • Gluegun emphasizes modularity by encouraging the use of extensions and plugins.
   • You can easily add extensions for different parts of your CLI, such as configuration management, filesystem operations, or even HTTP requests.

2. "All-Star Cast of Libraries":

   • Gluegun uses popular and proven libraries internally, like:
     • Inquirer.js for interactive prompts.
     • Chalk for colorful output.
     • Enquirer for additional prompts.
     • Filesystem (fs-jetpack) for interacting with the filesystem in an intuitive manner.
   • This "all-star" setup provides a developer-friendly experience because it builds on well-established tools that many JavaScript developers are already familiar with.

3. Simplified CLI Command Structure:

   • Gluegun encourages creating commands as individual files in a commands directory.
   • Each command can easily include validation, arguments, options, and actions, which makes adding and modifying commands straightforward.
   • Gluegun also makes it easy to create subcommands and separate complex CLI tools into modular pieces.

4. Built-in Toolkit:

   • Provides utilities like filesystem, print (for logs), and http as part of its toolbox.
   • The toolbox object can be passed around to different parts of the application, making it easy to share utilities without explicitly importing them in each module.

5. Good for Prototyping:

   • Gluegun’s philosophy of low boilerplate and high productivity makes it an excellent choice for prototyping CLI tools quickly.
   • The configuration files and the use of JSON or YAML can be easily managed due to the integrated tooling.

Oclif:

Oclif, developed by Heroku (now a part of Salesforce), is another popular framework for building command-line tools in Node.js. It is particularly well-suited for building large, production-grade CLI tools that require precise control, stability, and maintainability.

Key Features of Oclif:

1. Command and Plugin-Based Architecture:

   • Oclif uses a command/plugin-based architecture, where each command is defined in its own file or as part of a plugin.
   • This architecture scales well for larger projects where you want to group functionality into plugins, which can be individually maintained or even shared with others.

2. First-Class TypeScript Support:

   • Oclif has built-in TypeScript support which allows developers to create strongly typed CLIs.
   • It includes proper type definitions and setup that make working with TypeScript easy from the get-go, enhancing maintainability.

3. Autogenerated CLI Documentation:

   • Oclif automatically generates CLI documentation based on the commands and arguments you provide, ensuring consistency between code and docs.
   • It also supports generating Markdown-based help and documentation, which is great for developer experience.

4. Built for Production:

   • Oclif is battle-tested by Heroku and is well-suited for building enterprise-level CLI tools.
   • Its strict structure helps enforce best practices, making sure that projects stay clean and maintainable as they grow.

5. Extensible Plugins:

   • Oclif is highly extensible through plugins, which can be published and shared with others.
   • You can add plugins like authentication helpers, telemetry, or commands that you may need in other projects, promoting code reuse.

6. Validation and Input Handling:

   • Commands in Oclif are well-structured and come with excellent argument and flag validation out of the box, reducing the amount of manual parsing developers need to do.
   • The use of decorators in TypeScript helps in cleanly defining expected inputs and outputs.

Comparison Summary:

Which One Should You Use?

• Use Gluegun If:

  • You are building a CLI tool that requires rapid prototyping and development.
  • You value flexibility and prefer working with well-known JavaScript libraries.
  • You like the idea of having a toolbox of utilities already built-in, which can be passed around without additional imports.

• Use Oclif If:

  • You are building a production-grade, scalable CLI with multiple commands and plugins.
  • You want first-class TypeScript support with strict type checking for better maintainability.
  • You need features like autogenerated documentation, plugins, and strong argument validation.
  • You prioritize a structured approach that enforces consistency as your CLI grows.

Conclusion:

Both Gluegun and Oclif are excellent choices depending on your use case. If you're working on Semantic Flow CLI and want something modular with rapid development and prototyping capabilities, Gluegun might be the right fit due to its flexibility and integrated library support.

However, if you want to build a highly organized, enterprise-level CLI with multiple plugins, subcommands, and perhaps first-class TypeScript support, Oclif would provide more structure and be easier to maintain in the long term.

Since you're interested in modularizing the code and considering moving subcommands under root commands, Gluegun's modular toolbox approach might also make for a smoother development experience. Additionally, Gluegun's integration of familiar libraries could help speed up implementation without needing to learn a whole new framework-specific way of doing things.

Let me know how you’d like to proceed or if you need more detailed guidance on how to implement a transition!

compare the interactivity of oclif and gluegun (chatgpt)

Comparison of Interactivity Between Gluegun and Oclif

Gluegun and Oclif both provide ways to build interactive command-line interfaces, but they differ significantly in their approach to interactivity, flexibility, and developer experience. Let’s dive into how each one handles interactivity and compare them directly:

Gluegun

Gluegun is particularly strong when it comes to creating interactive CLIs. It leverages an "all-star cast of libraries" that have well-known, powerful interactive capabilities. Let’s break down some of the interactivity features:

1. Built-In Support for Popular Libraries:

   • Inquirer.js and Enquirer are used internally to provide interactive prompts, which makes the setup of questions, forms, and multi-step workflows very intuitive.
   • You get features like input validation, lists, checkboxes, confirmation prompts, and even advanced input elements like password fields.

2. Toolbox Approach:

   • Gluegun’s "toolbox" is passed to every command, and it includes utilities for filesystem, print, http, and more. The toolbox.prompt makes it very straightforward to create interactive commands.
   • By bundling interactive prompt utilities directly in the toolbox, it ensures you have access to all necessary utilities without having to import them repeatedly, providing a clean developer experience.

3. Rich User Experience:

   • Using Chalk (for colorful output) and Inquirer.js, Gluegun can create interactive prompts that look attractive and provide a good user experience.
   • It offers flexibility to control the flow of interactions in a seamless way. For example, you could easily create conditional questions, where subsequent prompts depend on the user's previous answers.

4. Ease of Use:

   • Gluegun emphasizes rapid prototyping, so the interactive elements are quick to integrate without a steep learning curve.
   • Creating prompts is simple. Example:

     const { prompt } = toolbox;
     const result = await prompt.ask([
       {
         type: 'input',
         name: 'name',
         message: 'What is your name?',
       },
       {
         type: 'confirm',
         name: 'confirm',
         message: 'Do you want to proceed?',
       },
     ]);
     

   • This syntax is clean, concise, and easy to extend, making the interactive features accessible to developers of all skill levels.

Oclif

Oclif, designed by Heroku, focuses on building robust, production-grade CLI tools. It provides a different approach to interactivity:

1. Minimal Built-In Interactive Features:

   • Oclif is less opinionated about interactivity and does not include libraries like Inquirer.js directly.

   • To add interactivity, you need to bring in a library yourself (such as inquirer, prompt, or readline). While this adds flexibility, it also means a bit more setup is needed compared to Gluegun.

   • Example of using inquirer with Oclif:

     const inquirer = require('inquirer');
     
     class MyCommand extends Command {
       async run() {
         const answers = await inquirer.prompt([
           {
             type: 'input',
             name: 'name',
             message: 'What is your name?',
           },
           {
             type: 'confirm',
             name: 'confirm',
             message: 'Do you want to proceed?',
           },
         ]);
         console.log(answers);
       }
     }
     

   • Here, you need to manually include inquirer or a similar library and set up the questions.

2. TypeScript Integration:

   • One strength of Oclif is its native TypeScript support, allowing interactive prompts to be strongly typed. This can be useful if you want your prompt responses to be automatically checked by TypeScript.
   • It also means you can enforce strict validation through TypeScript interfaces, giving your interactive prompts a more predictable and controlled behavior.

3. Control and Extensibility:

   • Oclif provides more control over the structure of your CLI, making it ideal for building production-grade tools with rigorous requirements.
   • However, interactivity isn't its primary strength, as it leans towards a modular plugin architecture, which focuses more on scalability and command organization.

4. Structured Input Handling:

   • Commands and flags in Oclif are very structured. You get good argument and flag validation but less focus on rich, interactive inputs.
   • For commands that need more than just command-line flags, the integration of inquirer or similar libraries can make Oclif just as interactive, but this requires more effort.

Side-by-Side Comparison:

Which One to Choose for Interactivity?

• Choose Gluegun if:

  • You need a highly interactive CLI with rich user prompts, and you want the setup to be as easy as possible.
  • You value having interactive tools integrated out of the box, with minimal configuration.
  • You are looking to prototype quickly with familiar tools like Inquirer.js and Chalk.

• Choose Oclif if:

  • Your CLI focuses on command structure, stability, and extensibility more than interactivity.
  • You need strict validation and strong typing for inputs and are willing to put in more effort to build a polished, production-grade CLI.
  • You prefer to have control over which third-party libraries you include for interactivity, and you want a more explicit and customized integration.

Conclusion:

Gluegun is the better choice if you want easy interactivity with rich, attractive prompts, as it integrates these tools right into the framework. It makes building a modular and interactive CLI tool a breeze, with less initial setup. Oclif, on the other hand, is more structured, suitable for larger, production-level tools that may not prioritize interactivity as much. While Oclif can also be made interactive, it requires additional steps and lacks the seamless out-of-the-box experience that Gluegun provides for interactive command-line prompts.

What if I wanted prompts to be dynamic over the network, like not pre-defined but a remote server gives the options

If you want prompts to be dynamic over the network, where options are not predefined but fetched from a remote server, you'll need to modify how you handle the prompts in the CLI. Both Gluegun and Oclif can achieve this, though their approaches will differ based on modularity, flexibility, and developer comfort.

Dynamic Prompts Over the Network - Concept Overview

1. Make a Network Request:

   • Use an HTTP client to send a request to a server that responds with the data needed for the prompt (e.g., available options).
   • The response from the server could include a list of choices, text options, etc.

2. Modify Prompt Logic:

   • Depending on the response, dynamically adjust the question type and options.
   • This approach can make your CLI more adaptive, allowing prompts to change based on server conditions, user-specific settings, or real-time updates.

Example with Gluegun:

Gluegun, with its built-in HTTP client (toolbox.http) and prompt utilities, is well-suited for this kind of dynamic prompting. Here’s how you might approach it:

module.exports = {
  name: 'example',
  run: async toolbox => {
    const { prompt, http, print } = toolbox;

    // Fetch dynamic data from a server
    try {
      const response = await http.get('https://example.com/api/options');
      if (response.status === 200) {
        const options = response.data.options;

        // Use the fetched options in the prompt
        const result = await prompt.ask([
          {
            type: 'select',
            name: 'choice',
            message: 'Please select an option:',
            choices: options
          }
        ]);

        print.info(`You selected: ${result.choice}`);
      } else {
        print.error('Failed to retrieve options from the server.');
      }
    } catch (error) {
      print.error(`Network error: ${error.message}`);
    }
  }
};

• Network Request: http.get('https://example.com/api/options') fetches the options.
• Dynamic Prompt: The response's options array is used directly in the prompt. Gluegun’s prompt.ask() can easily adapt to the server-provided options.

Example with Oclif:

In Oclif, you’ll need to include your own HTTP library, such as axios or the built-in fetch(), since Oclif doesn't have a built-in HTTP client like Gluegun. Here's a similar example using Oclif:

const { Command } = require('@oclif/core');
const axios = require('axios');

class DynamicPromptCommand extends Command {
  async run() {
    try {
      const response = await axios.get('https://example.com/api/options');
      if (response.status === 200) {
        const options = response.data.options;

        const inquirer = require('inquirer');
        const answers = await inquirer.prompt([
          {
            type: 'list',
            name: 'choice',
            message: 'Please select an option:',
            choices: options
          }
        ]);

        this.log(`You selected: ${answers.choice}`);
      } else {
        this.error('Failed to retrieve options from the server.');
      }
    } catch (error) {
      this.error(`Network error: ${error.message}`);
    }
  }
}

DynamicPromptCommand.description = 'A command that demonstrates dynamic prompting over the network';
module.exports = DynamicPromptCommand;

• Network Request: Uses axios to make a request to the API.
• Prompt: Uses inquirer to create a prompt based on the server response.

Comparison: Gluegun vs Oclif for Dynamic Prompts:

Detailed Steps to Implement Dynamic Prompts Over the Network:

1. Fetch Data:

   • In both frameworks, you would fetch data from a remote API endpoint.
   • In Gluegun, you can use toolbox.http.get().
   • In Oclif, use axios or the built-in fetch().

2. Parse the Response:

   • Extract the required values for your prompt from the response.
   • Ensure to handle network errors gracefully, as the prompts depend on the success of the request.

3. Dynamically Update Prompts:

   • Use the fetched data to define the options for your prompt.
   • In Gluegun, use toolbox.prompt.ask() and dynamically adjust based on the API response.
   • In Oclif, use inquirer.prompt() to create dynamic prompts.

Which One Is Better for Dynamic Prompts?

• Gluegun is better suited for dynamically-generated prompts due to its integrated toolbox.http client and built-in interactive prompt library. This setup reduces the number of dependencies and lines of code, making the process of fetching and using server-driven data more seamless.
• Oclif can certainly achieve the same result, but requires manual integration of third-party libraries, like axios and inquirer. This makes the setup more cumbersome compared to Gluegun, but Oclif provides more explicit control over what libraries are used, which might be preferable in some production environments.

Conclusion:

If you want to build a CLI that dynamically changes its options based on data fetched from a server, Gluegun provides a more integrated, easy-to-use environment. The toolbox abstraction, combined with powerful built-in interactive utilities, makes it a natural fit for such scenarios.

On the other hand, if you prefer a more explicit setup where you control each dependency and have strong typing (especially if using TypeScript), Oclif is a viable option but with added boilerplate.

For your use case of making prompts dynamic over the network, Gluegun would likely offer a smoother developer experience due to its toolbox-based architecture and the all-in-one approach to utilities like HTTP requests and prompting.

What if I want to build a whole text-based cli that has various information displayed, and then a CLI/prompt on the bottom.

(TUI Framewok)

If you want to build a text-based CLI that includes various information displayed on the screen with a CLI prompt at the bottom, you're essentially looking to create a TUI (Text-based User Interface) that allows continuous user interaction.

Here’s an overview of how you could approach building such a tool, along with the comparative use of Gluegun and Oclif, and other options:

Requirements for Your Use Case:

1. Text Display Panel:

   • Display static or dynamic information at the top or side of the terminal window.
   • For example, this could include stats, details about the repository, information logs, or even status updates.

2. CLI/Prompt at the Bottom:

   • Continuously show a command prompt at the bottom, allowing users to enter commands while still being able to see the information displayed above.

3. Interactive Flow:

   • Allow for commands that might modify what’s displayed, add more information, or interact with the filesystem in real-time.

Tools for Building a TUI

Neither Gluegun nor Oclif is specifically designed for TUI applications out of the box. They are more focused on standard CLI tools. However, you can still achieve the desired functionality by combining other libraries or using TUI-specific frameworks. Here are some approaches:

1. Using Gluegun or Oclif as the Core Command Framework:

• You can combine Gluegun or Oclif with additional TUI libraries to create a full text-based interface.

• Gluegun:

  • It is highly modular, meaning you could extend the command logic to include display elements using other libraries.
  • The toolbox provides utilities for easy integration with TUI libraries.

• Oclif:

  • You could use Oclif as the base framework for commands and flags but would need a separate mechanism for managing the interface continuously.

To achieve a full TUI:

• You would combine either Gluegun or Oclif for handling command inputs and arguments with a TUI library for the actual text-based display.

2. TUI Libraries/Tools for JavaScript and TypeScript:

To create a text-based interface with a command prompt at the bottom, you’d use a TUI library designed specifically for building more interactive and visually rich command-line interfaces:

1. Blessed and Blessed-Contrib:

• Blessed is a JavaScript library for creating TUIs, similar to ncurses for Node.js.

• Blessed-Contrib: This is an extension of Blessed that makes it easier to create more sophisticated dashboards with charts, grids, tables, and other components.

• Example Usage:

  • You can create a window layout using Blessed that includes different areas for displaying information.
  • The prompt at the bottom could be implemented as an input box that users interact with.

  const blessed = require('blessed');
  const contrib = require('blessed-contrib');
  
  const screen = blessed.screen();
  
  // Create a grid layout
  const grid = new contrib.grid({ rows: 12, cols: 12, screen: screen });
  
  // Adding elements to the grid (e.g., a log panel)
  const log = grid.set(0, 0, 8, 12, blessed.log, {
    label: 'Log',
    tags: true,
    border: { type: 'line' },
    style: { border: { fg: 'cyan' } }
  });
  
  // Add an input field at the bottom for user commands
  const input = blessed.textbox({
    bottom: 0,
    height: 3,
    inputOnFocus: true,
    label: ' Command Prompt ',
    border: { type: 'line' },
    style: { border: { fg: 'yellow' } }
  });
  
  screen.append(input);
  screen.append(log);
  
  input.focus();
  
  input.on('submit', (value) => {
    log.log(`You entered: ${value}`);
    input.clearValue();
    input.focus();
    screen.render();
  });
  
  screen.key(['q', 'C-c'], () => process.exit(0));
  screen.render();
  

  • Explanation:
    • blessed.log: Displays a running log (can show command outputs or dynamic info).
    • textbox: Acts as a command prompt, allowing users to enter commands and display the results.

2. Ink:

• Ink is a library for building beautiful and interactive CLIs using React.

• It lets you build UIs using React components, which can include interactive prompts, dynamic displays, and so on.

• Example of Usage:

  • You could define components that display various information while always keeping an input prompt at the bottom for user interaction.

  import React, { useState } from 'react';
  import { render, Text, Box, useInput } from 'ink';
  
  const App = () => {
    const [log, setLog] = useState([]);
  
    useInput((input, key) => {
      if (key.return) {
        setLog([...log, `You entered: ${input}`]);
      }
    });
  
    return (
      <Box flexDirection="column">
        <Box>
          <Text>Press enter after typing your command:</Text>
        </Box>
        <Box>
          {log.map((entry, index) => (
            <Text key={index}>{entry}</Text>
          ))}
        </Box>
      </Box>
    );
  };
  
  render(<App />);
  

  • Explanation:
    • useInput: Hook that listens for input.
    • Dynamic Rendering: Using React components allows for seamless updates to the log display.

3. Vorpal:

• Vorpal is a framework for building interactive CLIs, similar to interactive shells.

• It provides a command prompt that allows for commands to be entered interactively, and it’s a good choice if you want to keep a live REPL-like experience.

• Example:

  const vorpal = require('vorpal')();
  
  vorpal
    .command('greet <name>', 'Greets a user by name.')
    .action(function (args, callback) {
      this.log(`Hello, ${args.name}!`);
      callback();
    });
  
  vorpal
    .delimiter('sf-cli$')
    .show();
  

  • Explanation:
    • Live Shell: Vorpal creates a shell-like interface.
    • You can run commands and get responses directly in an interactive shell loop.

Which Approach Should You Choose?

• Gluegun or Oclif Combined with Blessed or Ink:

  • If you want the core CLI framework (like Gluegun or Oclif) to handle logic and argument parsing, while using Blessed or Ink to build out a sophisticated text-based user interface, this is a powerful combination.
  • Blessed provides a traditional terminal UI feel with panes, logs, and inputs, while Ink allows you to leverage React if you’re comfortable with that ecosystem.

• Standalone TUI with Blessed/Ink/Vorpal:

  • If your entire application needs to be interactive all the time, and you want a more fluid text-based interface, you could consider building directly with Blessed, Ink, or Vorpal.
  • Vorpal can give you an interactive shell, which may suffice if your commands are mostly typed input without requiring a detailed text-based display panel.

Summary:

• For your scenario, where you want a rich TUI with dynamic information displayed alongside a command prompt, Blessed or Ink would be the best libraries for building the interface.
• You could use Gluegun or Oclif as your command handler framework and integrate it into a larger TUI built with Blessed or Ink.
• Gluegun’s modular approach can be more easily extended into a rich UI with Blessed, while Oclif is great for command organization if you prefer strict type-checking and plugin-based architecture.

Feel free to ask if you need more guidance or an example that integrates Gluegun or Oclif with one of these TUI libraries!

how does gluegun toolbox provides utilities for easy integration with TUI libraries?

References

• https://developer.vonage.com/en/blog/comparing-cli-building-libraries
• https://tlakomy.com/notes-egghead-cli-tooling-oclif-ts
• https://www.joshcanhelp.com/oclif/

---

Backlinks

• Gluegun
• Oclif