Boost.Beast VS drogon

There is at least one notable exception to this rule: https://github.com/boostorg/beast/issues/1445

I am using this example : https://github.com/boostorg/beast/blob/develop/example/websocket/client/async-ssl/websocket_client_async_ssl.cpp My application is listening to tick data streams of crypto exchanges over the websockets and processing and sending orders to the exchange.

We used beast to implement a market data server(and I think we also did a small client, to test it) which was sending protobuf messages, and it worked great(we also used boost adio, which made it very scalable). When we tested the server, we were generating around 100k messages per second(when there was the biggest activity on the market), I think I've posted here some stats: https://github.com/boostorg/beast/issues/2313.

Boost Beast?

And Chris wrote this example, which is faster than any of my other examples: https://github.com/boostorg/beast/tree/21cd552399aa8167ed53c21a74f3711c2c316d2f/example/http/server/fast

cmake -h. -Bbuild && cmake --build build

to work about 90% of the time. Far more luck than I've had with autotools.

> Its code is horrifying too, for example:

1) I'm sure I could find some horriffic code in meson too if I went digging. 2) The alternative to this is you having to write something equivalent in your own code, meaning that in my code I don't need to do stuff like [0] in my code to detect features; my build system handles it for me. 3) CMake supports more platforms and targets than I've ever seen in my life, and likely supports more compilers than are necessary. that's a blessing and a curse, but it means that if I write simple program to run on some crufty microcontroller with a bastardised gcc toolchain from the 90s, it's fairly likely that cmake supports it out of the box. Code like that is the price to pay for that level of support.

[0] https://github.com/boostorg/beast/blob/b7344b0d501f23f763a76...

If you need an embedded C++ HTTP server then there are plenty of libraries/frameworks (in random order): Crow, RESTinio, Boost.Beast, cpp-httplib, http_backend, Pistache, RestBed, served, proxygen, Simple-Web-Server, drogon, oat++.

I looked at oatpp and drogon, which are both great, but feel too high-level for my purposes. I tried drogon and got something working, but it feels like too much for my requirements, as in particular I'd like to slot in my choice of Json and message-body handling. C.f. the simple approach in Crow, which I easily understand and build on.

drogonframework/drogon i drogonframework/trantor

talking about C++, there are drogon framework: https://github.com/drogonframework/drogon

not bells and whistles like on Wt as there are no integrated widgets. But have c++ based template (for HTML) engine and other integrated parts what you expect from framework (routing, controllers, db, authentication handling and so on).

and boasts high performance design

C++ - my favorite language, and, with modern revisions, extremely expressive and readable. There isn't a web server in the standard library, but there are a number of solid open-source choices (e.g., Drogon).

> * Let’s not pretend all conceivable applications are, or should be, written in C++.*

This is a discussion on C++.

> People mostly stopped using C++ to develop web servers which handle web requests, because they moved to Java, C#, PHP, Ruby, Python, etc.

I'm not sure you understood what I said, or thought things through.

By the way, the top performing web framework in the Tech Empower benchmark is a C++ framework which uses C++'s standard smart pointers.

https://github.com/drogonframework/drogon

Also, one of the most popular web frameworks for Python started off as an April Fools joke. I'm not sure what's your point.

Lastly, the main reason why C++ ceased to be the most popular choice in some domains was because it was during a very long time the most popular choice in some domains, and still remains one of the most popular choices. Some of the reasons why C++ dropped in popularity is the fact that some vendors decided to roll their own alternatives while removing support for C++. Take for instance Microsoft, which was once responsible for making C++ the only tool in town for professional software development. Since it started pushing C# for all sorts of web applications, multi-platform applications, and even desktop applications, and also pushing the adoption of those technologies as a basic requirement to distribute apps in its app store, developers can only use technologies that exist. But does that say anything about the merits of C++?

https://github.com/drogonframework/drogon has the best performance afaik

Drogon is a framework for doing web backend in c++ but it is nowhere near on the level of something like Django in terms of ergonomics. In terms of Rust, Rocket is trying to be the easy to use framework with low boilerplate.

> How would one go about building a rest service in C++?

I'd use https://github.com/drogonframework/drogon if the app needs to be pure C++ or Cutelyst (https://cutelyst.org/) if it's a Qt app which needs to expose an http server

About the project - I was trying to find the perfect reliable and performant rust's web framework to use for one of my personal project, and since I've been using Drogon/uWebSockets previously, I wanted to choose the best one to replace it. So I decided to create a benchmark system that is fully automated.