Mongoose VS Boost.Beast

I've found myself at this webpage multiple times while trying to minimize the complexity of APIs in my C projects.

My conclusion for now is that C coroutines are something to be left to the implementer. For example: Mongoose (https://github.com/cesanta/mongoose) uses event callbacks to deal with asynchronousness. It is much more pleasant to wrap a library like this in whatever thread/task primitives your system has rather than try to integrate the mythical cross-platform c couroutine.

I remember using mongoose 15 years back. Today i would have considered mongoose(10k+ stars) which is also a mature c/c++ web server[1] if not the licence.

https://github.com/cesanta/mongoose/tree/master/examples

Alternatives at the low to medium level of abstraction include civetweb and mongoose, which have a common ancestor. Both of these appear to be C rather than C++, but seem to be production quality and well-documented. Another C library is cpp-httplib, which is probably too low-level for me.

Since this is only going to be used internally would Mongoose be worth considering?

Here’s an example: https://mongoose.ws/

If you are looking for something simple there is mongoose from cesanta, https://github.com/cesanta/mongoose

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++.