Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A Comparison of Go Web Frameworks (2014)

corner.squareup.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 28 posts

Re: A Comparison of Go Web Frameworks (2014)

#11

Post by interactiv »

beefsack wrote: post #3

Articles on Go web frameworks all end up at the same conclusion. The Go standard library is so strong around web servers it's hard to recommend anything else.

> The Go standard library is so strong around web servers it's hard to recommend anything else.

The http packages provides the bare minimum. A serious app requires way more features than what is provided,a router than handles route variables, a middleware stack, a proper context, a proper session mechanism if one writes a website...

So it's normal people write their own libraries on top of it ( like mine @ gopkg.in/interactiv/expresso.v0 ,still alpha )

Re: A Comparison of Go Web Frameworks (2014)

#15

Post by bojo »

tptacek wrote: post #5
beefsack wrote: post #3

Articles on Go web frameworks all end up at the same conclusion. The Go standard library is so strong around web servers it's hard to recommend anything else.

It's not entirely that simple. The problem isn't that net/http is so amazing that it's silly to replace it; it's that the replacements aren't yet up to the challenge --- by which I mean, none of them are yet so much of a win that the cost of losing compatibility with net/http outweighs the benefits. Writing full-featured web apps in Golang in 2015 is still a lot like writing a Sinatra app was 8 years ago. It feels gr…

An alternative way to look at it would be "you are only building the 20% of Rails you actually need."

I've never been a fan of full-fledged frameworks and prefer the more pragmatic method of only pulling in components that I need though.

Re: A Comparison of Go Web Frameworks (2014)

#16

Post by Everlag »

cat9 wrote: post #10

I've been using go-json-rest, which is by way of "just enough on top of net/http to make APIs easier." https://ant0ine.github.io/go-json-rest/ Gorilla is useful, but more for its range of standalone components than as a framework. https://github.com/gorilla Then you'll want database-related packages like redigo and gorp. https://github.com/garyburd/redigo https://github.com/go-gorp/gorp

I have been using go-restful which lets you wrap documentation into the code. It generates swagger docs which are very nice to deal with.

https://github.com/emicklei/go-restful

Re: A Comparison of Go Web Frameworks (2014)

#17

Post by mattmc »

cat9 wrote: post #10

I've been using go-json-rest, which is by way of "just enough on top of net/http to make APIs easier." https://ant0ine.github.io/go-json-rest/ Gorilla is useful, but more for its range of standalone components than as a framework. https://github.com/gorilla Then you'll want database-related packages like redigo and gorp. https://github.com/garyburd/redigo https://github.com/go-gorp/gorp

Gorp is nice, although I prefer the sqlx-based flavor, Modl (https://github.com/jmoiron/modl).

Re: A Comparison of Go Web Frameworks (2014)

#19

Post by socceroos »

hippo8 wrote: post #14
tptacek wrote: post #6

This is pretty old, especially in "Go Web Framework" terms.

So what is new? Not trying to be funny or anything, I am genuinely interested.

Its missing a lot of the newer more idiomatic frameworks/libraries that have gained considerable traction.

There's heaps of them, but the major one that strikes me is Negroni.

Post reply on HN