Laminate › Comparison

How Laminate compares

Honest comparison with the alternatives

Feature laminate serde_with eserde figment config
Type coercion 4 levels, graduated Per-field macros No No Basic
Multi-error Yes (partial success) No Yes (all-Err) No No
Type detection 16+ types, confidence No No No No
Source hints CSV/JSON/Env No No Provider merging Provider merging
Diagnostics Risk-leveled No Error list No No
Domain packs 6 domains No No No No
AI/LLM adapters Anthropic/OpenAI/Ollama No No No No
Schema inference Yes No No No No
Derive macro Yes (7 attributes) Yes (macros) Yes (derive) No No
Streaming/SSE Yes No No No No

When to use Laminate

  • You're consuming external data (APIs, CSV, config) and need forgiving parsing
  • You want to know WHAT was coerced, not just that it worked
  • You need type detection on unknown data
  • You're building AI/LLM applications with multi-provider support
  • You need domain-specific parsing (medical, financial, logistics)

When NOT to use Laminate

  • You control both producer and consumer — use serde directly
  • You need maximum deserialization performance with zero overhead — use serde
  • You only need per-field customization — serde_with is simpler
  • You only need configuration merging — figment or config is more focused