Pros of iText

• More comprehensive feature set for PDF manipulation
• Larger community and better documentation
• Regular updates and active maintenance

Cons of iText

• Commercial licensing required for many use cases
• Steeper learning curve due to extensive API
• Larger library size, potentially impacting application size

Code Comparison

PDF-Writer:

PDFWriter pdfWriter;
pdfWriter.StartPDF("output.pdf", ePDFVersion13);
PDFPage* page = pdfWriter.CreatePage();
page->WriteToStream(pdfWriter.GetWriteStream());
pdfWriter.EndPDF();

iText:

PdfWriter writer = new PdfWriter("output.pdf");
PdfDocument pdf = new PdfDocument(writer);
Document document = new Document(pdf);
document.add(new Paragraph("Hello World!"));
document.close();

Key Differences

• PDF-Writer is written in C++, while iText is primarily Java-based
• iText offers more advanced features like digital signatures and form filling
• PDF-Writer has a simpler API, making it easier for beginners to get started
• iText has better support for PDF/A and other PDF standards
• PDF-Writer is open-source and free for commercial use, unlike iText

Both libraries are capable of creating and manipulating PDF documents, but iText is generally more feature-rich and widely used in enterprise environments, while PDF-Writer may be more suitable for simpler use cases or projects with licensing constraints.

Pros of PDFBox

• More comprehensive feature set, including PDF creation, manipulation, and extraction
• Larger community and better documentation
• Active development with frequent updates and bug fixes

Cons of PDFBox

• Steeper learning curve due to its extensive API
• Larger library size, which may impact application size and performance
• More complex setup and configuration process

Code Comparison

PDFBox:

PDDocument document = new PDDocument();
PDPage page = new PDPage();
document.addPage(page);
PDPageContentStream contentStream = new PDPageContentStream(document, page);
contentStream.beginText();

PDF-Writer:

PDFWriter pdfWriter;
PDFPage* page = pdfWriter.CreatePage();
PageContentContext* contentContext = pdfWriter.StartPageContentContext(page);
PDFUsedFont* font = pdfWriter.GetFontForFile("arial.ttf");
contentContext->BT();

Both libraries provide methods for creating PDF documents and adding content. PDFBox uses a more object-oriented approach with separate classes for different components, while PDF-Writer uses a more procedural style with a central PDFWriter object.

PDFBox offers a more Java-centric API, while PDF-Writer is designed for C++ developers. The choice between the two may depend on the programming language preference and specific project requirements.

Pros of libharu

• Lightweight and efficient C library for PDF generation
• Extensive documentation and examples available
• Cross-platform support (Windows, macOS, Linux)

Cons of libharu

• Less active development compared to PDF-Writer
• Limited support for advanced PDF features
• C-based API may be less intuitive for some developers

Code Comparison

PDF-Writer (C++):

PDFWriter pdfWriter;
PDFPage* page = pdfWriter.CreatePage(0, 0, 595, 842);
PageContentContext* contentContext = pdfWriter.StartPageContentContext(page);
contentContext->WriteText(10, 800, "Hello, World!");
pdfWriter.EndPageContentContext(contentContext);
pdfWriter.WriteToFile("output.pdf");

libharu (C):

HPDF_Doc pdf = HPDF_New(NULL, NULL);
HPDF_Page page = HPDF_AddPage(pdf);
HPDF_Page_BeginText(page);
HPDF_Page_SetFontAndSize(page, HPDF_GetFont(pdf, "Helvetica", NULL), 18);
HPDF_Page_TextOut(page, 10, 800, "Hello, World!");
HPDF_Page_EndText(page);
HPDF_SaveToFile(pdf, "output.pdf");
HPDF_Free(pdf);

Both libraries offer PDF generation capabilities, but PDF-Writer provides a more modern C++ interface with potentially easier-to-use abstractions. libharu, being a C library, may offer better performance in some cases but requires more manual memory management. The choice between the two depends on specific project requirements, language preferences, and desired features.

Pros of pdf.js

• Widely adopted and actively maintained by Mozilla
• Renders PDFs directly in web browsers without plugins
• Extensive documentation and community support

Cons of pdf.js

• Focused on rendering PDFs, not creating or editing them
• Larger file size and potentially slower performance for complex PDFs
• Limited support for advanced PDF features

Code Comparison

PDF-Writer (C++):

PDFWriter pdfWriter;
PDFPage* page = pdfWriter.CreatePage(0, 0, 595, 842);
PageContentContext* contentContext = pdfWriter.StartPageContentContext(page);
contentContext->WriteText(10, 800, "Hello World");

pdf.js (JavaScript):

pdfjsLib.getDocument('path/to/document.pdf').promise.then(function(pdf) {
  pdf.getPage(1).then(function(page) {
    var scale = 1.5;
    var viewport = page.getViewport({ scale: scale });
    // Render page content
  });
});

PDF-Writer is designed for creating and manipulating PDFs programmatically, while pdf.js focuses on rendering existing PDFs in web browsers. The code examples illustrate this difference, with PDF-Writer showing content creation and pdf.js demonstrating page rendering.