Closed dougg0k closed 1 year ago
It's based on it, but certainly has very decent API to use, and by no means barebones, it contains almost everything other libs do.
Also faster than fastify. Not because of that, right?
Also faster than fastify. Not because of that, right?
No. Reason was articulated above.
@mcollina Care to explain the reasoning, what is the problem with being from a different C lib?
Let me share my opinion: it is not a generic HTTP framework. It is focused on speed over user experience.
What does it mean?
uWebSockets
hyper-express
/uWebSockets
server's route, you don't get a 404, you will get a close connection
, you need to implement basic stuff by yourselfuWebSockets
is a perfect suite for a precise use case. That use case is not a generic web framework. uWebSockets
does not implement middleware or hooks nor a plugin system. It is a low-level, high-speed, low-features web server.hyper-express
server on the same port because the WS and HTTP protocol can work togetheruWebSockets
user. Moreover, any issue the user may face with the server should ask for support to the uWebSockets
community. Note that the project is open source, but owned by a private company with a bus factor equal to 1**uWebSockets
, you are not running the Node.js HTTP server code. It communicates with V8 directly, bypassing the Node.js layerHappy to learn something more by reading other opinions
Interesting readings:
** https://github.com/uNetworking/uWebSockets.js/graphs/contributors
Hey @Eomm
I understand, but mostly of what you said was to uWebsocket, not hyper-express which has more functionality built upon it, which improves on the DX. It has middleware support and more.
It should work on any debian based OS with nodejs out of the box.
As for the random route, if you ask the maintainer he might add.
Thanks for your input though.
I'm -1 to add this for the exact same reason we do not have uWebsocket.js. It's different C library than Node.js core.