tui-rs VS trippy

The TUI is built with the awesome Ratatui [0] library (formerly tui-rs [1]). UX is certainly not my area of expertise and I would not have been able to create Trippy without this library.

[0] https://github.com/ratatui-org/ratatui

[1] https://github.com/fdehau/tui-rs

Rust has great libraries for TUIs. tui-rs (https://github.com/fdehau/tui-rs) has been used in numerous popular applications, but is unmaintained. ratatui (https://github.com/tui-rs-revival/ratatui) is the maintained version, and is pretty new. Less widely known is cursive (https://github.com/gyscos/cursive), which I have yet to try.

Aside from the libraries, I just wanted to start a project that would make be better at Rust. The easy distribution with cargo is a huge bonus though.

CLI, use Clap. If you want to get fancy, use Tui.

u/lordnacho666 It uses the fabulous https://github.com/fdehau/tui-rs (now revived as https://github.com/tui-rs-revival/ratatui) TUI lib.

This app is based on the these two crate in rust (tui-rs , tui-textarea). The text area provide the Emacs motions and I integrated the vim motions there, but the editor in this app as much simpler than the huge VIM and Emacs systems

If you interested in the TUI apps in rust you can start with the crate tui-rs or its revival ratatui. They have examples inside of them which you can start and see the source code to get the basic functionalities. For the text editor you can check examples in the crate tui-textarea.

For Golang there is Bubbletea [1], Textual [2] for Python and tui-rs for Rust [3].

[1] https://github.com/charmbracelet/bubbletea

[2] https://github.com/textualize/textual

[3] https://github.com/fdehau/tui-rs

You can check tui-rs, is a library to build CLI interfaces and has some examples about using user input without blocking the UI

You are right that showing packet loss for intermediate hops is a frequent source of confusion.

Rather than leave it out, I added a status column which shows different statuses for intermediate hops (blue if the hop responds to less than 100% of probes and brown if it responds to 0%) vs the target hop (amber and red).

Where this breaks down is when dealing with ECMP for UDP & TCP tracing, as a given hop (ttl) may represent the target for a given round of tracing but not for the next. The mistake, imho, is to associate _any_ data with a hop (ttl) rather than the hop in the context of a tracing flow.

That is why Trippy had a number of features aimed at helping with ECMP, such as Paris and Dublin tracing, and the ability to filter tracing by unique flow id. I've covered these quite a bit in the 0.8.0 [0] and 0.9.0 [1] release notes if you want to know more.

[0] https://github.com/fujiapple852/trippy/releases/tag/0.8.0

Tracing flows: breakdown complex UDP/TCP ECMP traces into individual flows (i.e. common network path); render a chart of flows in GraphViz DOT format (example)

u/queiss_ the 0.8.0 release note has a section covering this, but the TL;DR is:

Since you mention gping, I’ll shamelessly plug Trippy, an mtr (traceroute + ping) alternative.