But why? ASP.NET Core is one of the best web frameworks, extremely modular and flexible. It's low level components (http server, routing) can be used as a foundation for new web frameworks.
no its not. We always can use alternatives
SimpleW – Web Server Library .NET Core
21–30 of 80 posts
Re: SimpleW – Web Server Library .NET Core
#22But why? ASP.NET Core is one of the best web frameworks, extremely modular and flexible. It's low level components (http server, routing) can be used as a foundation for new web frameworks.
The library's tagline says "Powerfully Simple. Blazingly Fast." So there. ::folds arms:: Joking aside, I do agree that ASP.NET Core is a behemoth. On .NET 9, I just now did `dotnet new webapi` followed by `dotnet publish --self-contained -p:PublishSingleFile=true` and the binary is 103MB. That would blow up the size of a mobile app considerably, just to listen to HTTP. There a separate use case that SimpleW won't sol…
Most of that is runtime taking up space. So yes, baseline is 103MB but outside that, it's not likely to balloon too much past assets. Compared to Python/Node/Java/Ruby containers I see as SRE, 103MB is god send.
I think you are expecting too much here.
Re: SimpleW – Web Server Library .NET Core
#23Earlier quoted context omitted.
>ASP.NET Core is one of the best web frameworks ...based on what?
In total. Just compare different web frameworks by performance, flexibility, features and so on. Whatever you compare, ASP.NET Core will probably end up in the top 20%.
crazy how people just dont want to believe it, but its really really good
Re: SimpleW – Web Server Library .NET Core
#24But why? ASP.NET Core is one of the best web frameworks, extremely modular and flexible. It's low level components (http server, routing) can be used as a foundation for new web frameworks.
author here.
I wanted to start with something small where I could read or write the code in a reasonable amount of time.
My usage was, and still is, for low traffic. I don't intend to replace the Kestrel beast.
Just a framework you can quickly understand without being lost in documentation once you want to custom a part.
Re: SimpleW – Web Server Library .NET Core
#25Earlier quoted context omitted.
The library's tagline says "Powerfully Simple. Blazingly Fast." So there. ::folds arms:: Joking aside, I do agree that ASP.NET Core is a behemoth. On .NET 9, I just now did `dotnet new webapi` followed by `dotnet publish --self-contained -p:PublishSingleFile=true` and the binary is 103MB. That would blow up the size of a mobile app considerably, just to listen to HTTP. There a separate use case that SimpleW won't sol…
Sometimes. It's usually a lot bigger than that the moment you pull in any simple dependencies. Also the CLR memory overhead is horrible. Our .Net guys have serious problems with startup time (JIT) and initialy latency on .Net Core so I don't trust the fast claim. And no you can't just AOT everything. We moved a couple of critical services over to Go because of those two issues and it turned a few heads.
Curious what the use-case is where JIT latency is an issue for a http service?
Re: SimpleW – Web Server Library .NET Core
#26At a quick glance it looks much simpler than e.g. Kestrel, which I found pretty confusing to get running.
author here.
that's the reason why i start the project. I had time and wanted something simple as my needs.
Re: SimpleW – Web Server Library .NET Core
#27Not sure about this one. It's based on NetCoreServer which is great but it's definitely not something I'd be comfortable putting into production over kestrel or IIS. From a performance standpoint, it is very difficult to beat kestrel now. If you don't want all the fancy Microsoft bullshit (I certainly don't), use the minimal APIs and map out routes to lightweight HttpContext handlers.
minimal APIs is microsoft bullshit also what does performance matter on webservers
> minimal APIs is microsoft bullshit
Agreed, but it is the least smelly pile they have on offer.
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/aspnet/core/fundamentals/m...
Re: SimpleW – Web Server Library .NET Core
#28But why? ASP.NET Core is one of the best web frameworks, extremely modular and flexible. It's low level components (http server, routing) can be used as a foundation for new web frameworks.
I agree that ASP.NET Core is fantastic and it doesn’t give you many reasons to look elsewhere. That said I think some diversity / competition / cross-pollination should be welcomed in the .NET space. Not a fair comparison but I’m glad Avalonia exists despite WPF, for example.
Avalonia is cross plateform unlike WPF.
Re: SimpleW – Web Server Library .NET Core
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sometimes. It's usually a lot bigger than that the moment you pull in any simple dependencies. Also the CLR memory overhead is horrible. Our .Net guys have serious problems with startup time (JIT) and initialy latency on .Net Core so I don't trust the fast claim. And no you can't just AOT everything. We moved a couple of critical services over to Go because of those two issues and it turned a few heads.
Curious what the use-case is where JIT latency is an issue for a http service?
Probably Serverless functions, which is a use case where standard ASP.NET Core is not particularly good.
I'd blame Serverless more than ASP.NET Core for the bad performance in that case though.
Re: SimpleW – Web Server Library .NET Core
#30But why? ASP.NET Core is one of the best web frameworks, extremely modular and flexible. It's low level components (http server, routing) can be used as a foundation for new web frameworks.
The library's tagline says "Powerfully Simple. Blazingly Fast." So there. ::folds arms:: Joking aside, I do agree that ASP.NET Core is a behemoth. On .NET 9, I just now did `dotnet new webapi` followed by `dotnet publish --self-contained -p:PublishSingleFile=true` and the binary is 103MB. That would blow up the size of a mobile app considerably, just to listen to HTTP. There a separate use case that SimpleW won't sol…
> The library's tagline says "Powerfully Simple. Blazingly Fast."
> Joking aside
author here.
I agree with your remark ^^
Each time i read some news about a new framework with tag "blazingly fast", i'm thinking "lol".
So i had to resist to the temptation... And finaly when doing a small benchmark, performances were not bad at all (https://stratdev3.github.io/SimpleW/guide/performances.html) and i let the "clickbait" title.
My targets are small to medium traffic and embeded devices (dotnet/android).