4 ms·
Django is cool, and has been my choice for a fair number of projects. Although recently I had an interesting experience with it when I wanted to use websockets
by siddhant 11y ago
Django is cool, and has been my choice for a fair number of projects. Although recently I had an interesting experience with it when I wanted to use websockets (yes, I know it's not written for that use case).
It was stunning that most of the solutions out there rely on some sort of a hack to get it working. I ended up porting over my project to Tornado, because I need websockets for a lot of the features I'm working on. And it worked out really well, especially after I combined it with SQLAlchemy and Alembic. 80% of the feature set right there. And SQLAlchemy is such a fantastic toolkit.
I'm hoping that django channels (http://channels.readthedocs.org/en/latest/ http://channels.readthedocs.org/en/latest/) stabilizes soon.
- Beltiras 11y agoThe Django community knows full well that this is a missing feature in modern web development. There was a talk featuring this topic at DUTH this fall. https://opbeat.com/events/duth/#twisted-and-django https://opbeat.com/events/duth/#twisted-and-django
- jonwayne 11y agoThe whole "WSGI revision" effort is intended to solve the problem of websockets (and HTTP 2.0) across frameworks and servers.
- jkarneges 11y agoI prefer to split a server app into a connection management layer and a backend logic layer. This way the backend can remain stateless which makes for easier maintenance. I use Django as the backend piece in most of my realtime apps (for example WebhookInbox) and it works great. Of course, native support for long-lived connections in Django would be cool, if only because it would mean the connection management layer could be built with Django too.