3 ms·
Sounds like you might be defining library vs framework as "library's are collections of functions with minimal if any state that needs carrying between calls to
by lostcolony 5y ago
Sounds like you might be defining library vs framework as "library's are collections of functions with minimal if any state that needs carrying between calls to exposed functions" then. Which is a possible way to distinguish them! Just...not how the author did.
Of course, that makes things like Go's inbuilt HTTP a bit weird; it's part of the standard library, but it also necessitates setting up handlers, which would potentially make it framework.
- dnautics 5y agoI'm conforming to the authors definition, as you present it. Under these criteria, Sinatra is categorically closer to rails than a Jason library. What might an http server library look like? It would have a function that blocks on accepting a socket, a function that parses the socket contents into a data structure, and a function that lets you send a response. That's not what Sinatra looks like, at all. If you make a claim otherwise, you are on shaky ground. Let go.