GASP vs Pre-commit
While both GASP and pre-commit serve similar purposes in managing Git hooks, they take different approaches. Here's a detailed comparison to help you choose the right tool for your needs.
Feature Comparison
| Aspect | GASP | Pre-commit |
|---|---|---|
| Language | Go (binário compilado) | Python (interpretado) |
| Installation | Single binary, no dependencies | Requires Python + pip install |
| Performance | Faster (Go native) | Slower (Python + overhead) |
| Configuration | Simple shell scripts in hooks/ | Complex YAML (.pre-commit-config.yaml) |
| Hook Structure | hooks/ directory with executables | Remote repos + YAML config |
| Cross-platform | Windows, Linux, macOS | Windows, Linux, macOS |
| Dependencies | No external dependencies | Manages dependencies automatically |
| Available Hooks | Custom local scripts | Vast ecosystem of ready hooks |
| Setup Ease | Very simple: scripts in hooks/ | Requires YAML and repo knowledge |
| Hook Versioning | With project | Via repository tags |
| Updates | With project dependencies | pre-commit autoupdate |
| Flexibility | High (any shell script) | High (multiple languages/tools) |
| Learning Curve | Low (basic shell knowledge) | Medium-high (YAML, pre-commit concepts) |
| Environment | No isolation | Isolated virtual environments |
| Caching | Not implemented | Integrated cache system |
| Debugging | Direct script output | Detailed logs and verbose mode |
| Portability | Portable binary | Requires Python environment |
| Maintenance | Low (few features) | Medium (complex ecosystem) |
| Community | Small/new | Large and active |
| Documentation | Limited | Extensive and complete |