Flask 1.0 Released

Post by discordance » Fri, Apr 27, 2018, 12:44 AM UTC

wybiral wrote: post #21

BerislavLopac wrote: post #7

I understand that Flask has become popular because it is easy to learn, but my experience is that as your knowledge progresses it just keeps getting in your way. I particularly dislike some design choices which look like afterthought hacks, such as global variables for current request and using abort() functions instead of raising exceptions directly. EDIT: To avoid hollow naysaying, here are some alternatives to Fla…

I've never seen Falcon, thanks. Flask is still one of the most approachable frameworks I've used. It's great for getting something hacked out really quickly, but for asynchronous requests Tornado is where it's at. That being said, when I really want performance I usually reach for Golang.

Post by gusmd » Fri, Apr 27, 2018, 12:50 AM UTC

joshuamorton wrote: post #56

nicodjimenez wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Flask _does_ scale really well with lines of codes. However the limitations of Python w.r.t. async log really start to show once you step beyond simple CRUD apps.

Just use sanic. It's a mostly drop in replacement for flask that is async first and runs on uvloop.

Post by weberc2 » Fri, Apr 27, 2018, 1:43 AM UTC

icebraining wrote: post #41

weberc2 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. I particularly like Go's web ecosystem. A web server is just a function, and that function is often a composition of other functions (for example, a tree of router functions and then a handler for each route). By contrast, it seems like Flask goes to great lengths to obscure such a simple concept (decorators for routes, global variables for state and resource management, etc).

I wouldn't call it obscure, it's just an abstraction. But you can always use the underlying library ( http://werkzeug.pocoo.org/ ), which does send everything through a function. Or just implement WSGI directly.

    class Route(typing.NamedTuple):
        path: typing.re.Pattern
        method: str
        handler: http.Handler

    class Router:
        def __init__(self, routes: typing.List[Route]) -> None:
            self.routes = routes

        def serve_http(self, r: http.Request) -> http.Response:
            """serve_http implements the http.Handler interface"""
            for route in self.routes:
                if route.path.matches(r.path):
                    return route.handler(r)
            return http.NotFound("404 NOT FOUND")

    class Server(typing.NamedTuple):
        db: DBConnPool

        def first_route(self, r: http.Request) -> http.Response:
            """first_route uses shared `db` resource."""
            pass

        def second_route(self, r: http.Request) -> http.Response:
            """second_route uses shared `db` resource too!"""
            pass

Post by bpicolo » Fri, Apr 27, 2018, 1:53 AM UTC

joshuamorton wrote: post #56

nicodjimenez wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Flask _does_ scale really well with lines of codes. However the limitations of Python w.r.t. async log really start to show once you step beyond simple CRUD apps.

Just use sanic. It's a mostly drop in replacement for flask that is async first and runs on uvloop.

Post by mixmastamyk » Fri, Apr 27, 2018, 1:56 AM UTC

diminoten wrote: post #60

mixmastamyk wrote: post #30

Love Flask in theory. My biggest complaint was trying to do user management with it. Flask-Security was good, but the developer skipped town a few years ago. Did they come back? :D Basically you are left to your own devices, which sounds great, but user+auth is pretty fundamental to be left to a random absentee third-party in my opinion.

Try farming out the auth to a middleware. That's what I do and it works really well.