Learn how Athas and CodeEdit differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these general purpose editors is best for you.
Last 30 days
Last commit
2 days agoRepository age
1 yearVersion
v0.17.0License
AGPL-3.0Repository
athasdev/athas
Last 30 days
Last commit
22 days agoRepository age
5 yearsVersion
v0.3.6License
MITRepository
codeeditapp/codeedit
CodeEdit appears to have several advantages over Athas, particularly in popularity, maturity and licensing. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
CodeEdit significantly outpaces Athas in community adoption with 23,102 stars compared to 3,121 stars on GitHub. This 7.4x difference suggests CodeEdit has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, CodeEdit has 1,195 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
Athas is growing faster, adding 24 stars in the last 30 days (+0.8%) against adding 38 stars for CodeEdit (+0.2%). Athas is the smaller project of the two, so it is closing the gap rather than extending a lead.
Both projects show recent activity, with Athas last updated 2 days ago and CodeEdit 22 days ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with Bash. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Athas uses JavaScript, CSS, Typescript, JSX, Rust, Tauri while CodeEdit leverages C, Objective-C, Swift, Ruby.
CodeEdit has been in development longer, starting 5 years ago, compared to Athas which began 1 year ago. This 3.3-year head start suggests CodeEdit may have more mature features and established processes.
CodeEdit uses the MIT license, which is more permissive than Athas's AGPL-3.0 license, potentially offering greater flexibility for commercial use and integration.
Both tools serve similar use cases in General Purpose Editors. However, they also have distinct specializations: Athas also focuses on AI-Powered Editors.