4 ms·

> This is probably your best bet if you're just going to build a nice CRUD frontend for a business app, possibly with an API (via DRF). If I had to choose a fr

> This is probably your best bet if you're just going to build a nice CRUD frontend for a business app, possibly with an API (via DRF). If I had to choose a framework for a web API these days, I would go with something that is async from the ground up.

yedpodtrzitko 9y ago
Django Channels [1] + ASGI is exactly that. However making that the default would be a hit to the very good backward/forward compatibility Django keep having. [1] https://channels.readthedocs.io/en/latest/ https://channels.readthedocs.io/en/latest/
blowski 9y ago
Why? Async isn’t cost free - it’s more complicated and that complexity comes at a cost. If your company has only basic needs, you have to question whether you’re providing the best value for your company by doing anything more.
- jrs95 9y ago
  Especially when a platform doesn't have libraries that support it fully. Node and ASP.NET are the only fully async platforms I'm really aware of where this isn't a huge problem. Of course there are others with great but not async concurrency models as well. Regardless, it's definitely a minority of use cases where the concurrency model should even be a priority.
- Rotareti 9y ago
  > Why? Because we are getting more and more CPU cores to utilize. I don't think this trend will stop soon. The software stack will have to adjust to this and it already does. The next generation of mainstream (highlevel)languages/frameworks will be those that are designed to easily utilize CPU cores. It may be more expensive for now, but it might pay out later and I think it's much more exciting. ;)
  - konschubert 9y ago
    I honestly don't understand this argument. With 30 workers threads in Python Django, I should be able to make very good use of 6 CPUs even if the workers only run 20% of the time.
    - konschubert 9y ago
      I mean, actually think that I don't understand and would like to be educated.

yedpodtrzitko 9y ago

Django Channels [1] + ASGI is exactly that. However making that the default would be a hit to the very good backward/forward compatibility Django keep having. [1] https://channels.readthedocs.io/en/latest/ https://channels.readthedocs.io/en/latest/

blowski 9y ago

Why? Async isn’t cost free - it’s more complicated and that complexity comes at a cost. If your company has only basic needs, you have to question whether you’re providing the best value for your company by doing anything more.

jrs95 9y ago
Especially when a platform doesn't have libraries that support it fully. Node and ASP.NET are the only fully async platforms I'm really aware of where this isn't a huge problem. Of course there are others with great but not async concurrency models as well. Regardless, it's definitely a minority of use cases where the concurrency model should even be a priority.
Rotareti 9y ago
> Why? Because we are getting more and more CPU cores to utilize. I don't think this trend will stop soon. The software stack will have to adjust to this and it already does. The next generation of mainstream (highlevel)languages/frameworks will be those that are designed to easily utilize CPU cores. It may be more expensive for now, but it might pay out later and I think it's much more exciting. ;)
- konschubert 9y ago
  I honestly don't understand this argument. With 30 workers threads in Python Django, I should be able to make very good use of 6 CPUs even if the workers only run 20% of the time.
  - konschubert 9y ago
    I mean, actually think that I don't understand and would like to be educated.