3 ms·

I actually disagree. Flask does not necessarily shine with projects of high complexity. The framework designers themselves say as much: "However Flask is just

I actually disagree. Flask does not necessarily shine with projects of high complexity. The framework designers themselves say as much: "However Flask is just not designed for large applications or asynchronous servers. Flask wants to make it quick and easy to write a traditional web application."[1] Flask is excellent when you just don't need a bunch of the stuff in Django, and don't need the batteries to be included. It's not so much that Flask is suitable to high-complexity apps, but more that it's suited to highly custom web apps. Building a music sharing app based on jQuery mobile and backed by Mongo? You're better off with Flask. But at scale you're going to end up doing something custom. Django is highly suitable if you need to manage users, have a variety of entities that lend themselves to the admin dashboard (more broadly, that the admin/public app metaphor even makes sense in the first place), and find a plug-and-play package system compelling. They are both great frameworks, but "complexity" (advanced/simple) is the wrong axis along which to evaluate them. [1]http://flask.pocoo.org/docs/design/ http://flask.pocoo.org/docs/design/

dvanduzer 13y ago
The "large applications or asynchronous servers" bit might be better understood in comparison to the monolithic versus micro kernel debate. Flask is well suited for building complex applications that can be decomposed into simple moving parts with a clear separation of concerns. (My personal bias is that all complex applications can and should be developed this way.) The documented limitation you reference is based on the WSGI server being used. "If your server uses some kind of concurrency that is not based on threads or greenlets, Flask will no longer be able to support these global proxies."[0] As nginx+gunicorn is becoming more popular, this isn't really an issue at all. [0]http://flask.pocoo.org/docs/becomingbig/#scale-like-a-pro http://flask.pocoo.org/docs/becomingbig/#scale-like-a-pro
espeed 13y ago
"However Flask is just not designed for large applications or asynchronous servers. Flask wants to make it quick and easy to write a traditional web application." Armin has said before that he needs to update/clarify that statement -- as dvanduzer said, it's not really relevant anymore.

dvanduzer 13y ago

The "large applications or asynchronous servers" bit might be better understood in comparison to the monolithic versus micro kernel debate. Flask is well suited for building complex applications that can be decomposed into simple moving parts with a clear separation of concerns. (My personal bias is that all complex applications can and should be developed this way.) The documented limitation you reference is based on the WSGI server being used. "If your server uses some kind of concurrency that is not based on threads or greenlets, Flask will no longer be able to support these global proxies."[0] As nginx+gunicorn is becoming more popular, this isn't really an issue at all. [0]http://flask.pocoo.org/docs/becomingbig/#scale-like-a-pro http://flask.pocoo.org/docs/becomingbig/#scale-like-a-pro

espeed 13y ago

"However Flask is just not designed for large applications or asynchronous servers. Flask wants to make it quick and easy to write a traditional web application." Armin has said before that he needs to update/clarify that statement -- as dvanduzer said, it's not really relevant anymore.