Live data from Hacker News

Litestar is worth a look

b-list.org

1–10 of 86 posts

Re: Litestar is worth a look

#4
Excellent post that actually gets into important details for real-world applications. I'm a huge fan of the design of Litestar.

> I also still think there are a lot of bad use cases for repositories and service layers that people should avoid, but that’s a digression which should probably become its own post

As a huge proponent of the repository pattern, I'll be looking forward to this post.

Re: Litestar is worth a look

#7
Pretty cool post! I'm not sure how I feel about SQLAlchemy (not the star of the post but mentioned quite a bit); it's such a big ball of state that has so many surprises, I wonder if some people build entirely without it.

Re: Litestar is worth a look

#8
Thanks for writing this. I have similar gripes about FastAPI having developed an application over the past few years; I'm also continually surprised at how prevalent the attitude is that FastAPI has excellent docs, given how divorced the tutorial / toy examples in the docs are from real-world development and measurement of an API.

Re: Litestar is worth a look

#10

Pretty cool post! I'm not sure how I feel about SQLAlchemy (not the star of the post but mentioned quite a bit); it's such a big ball of state that has so many surprises, I wonder if some people build entirely without it.

There is a rather big difference between traditional SQLAlchemy and Advanced Alchemy which is also made by Litestar. We've build with pure SQL and with SQLAlchemy in the past, but since we transitioned from django ninja to Litestar, we've not used SQLAlchemy and are slowly moving away from it. Well I guess Advanced Alchemy is still SQLAlchemy under the hood.
Post reply on HN