cask VS zio-http

I want to just block as if there's no tomorrow, no effects / hardcore FP (maybe only something like https://github.com/softwaremill/ox), what would you use? E.g. for http server / db / json ?https://github.com/com-lihaoyi/cask ?

There's the Li Haoyi's ecosystem of tools and libraries that's fun to hack on, has a low entry-bar (with a design philosophy of using the least complex abstractions for the job), and has few libs like requests and cask that may appeal to those liking some python minimalism. That's not the fastest way to learn hardcore FP, that's not the worst either.

Wonder if anyone uses: https://github.com/com-lihaoyi/cask

Is play-framework a strong requirement? If not, you might have an easier time building a simple API and serializing JSON with the lihaoyi ecosystem, namely cask as the microframework and uPickle/uJson.

For people who want to get their feet wet with Scala, I highly recommend Cask and the rest of what some people affectionately call “the Singapore stack,” in honor of Li Haoyi, its developer. He emphasizes tasteful use of Scala features with an emphasis on API ergonomics. All of his work is a joy to use.

The documentation points to a pretty outdated example. Can you try with the latest 0.8.3 release?

If you want something really easy and simple, have a look at cask: https://com-lihaoyi.github.io/cask/

Best I can do is Cask: https://com-lihaoyi.github.io/cask/ 😅

For JNI, make sure you have `-H:+JNI` in your native image options. Be aware that Netty is a bit of a monster to include in a native image application (I just recently added it a Netty dependency and it completely broke my project and took a good day to figure out). Mine was through zio-http and I was able to piece together some working options from github issues: https://github.com/zio/zio-http/issues/20.

What's the hardware being used for your test? I get 55k RPS with a basic 200 responder with zio-http[0] (which uses Netty) on my i5-6600K, and over 20k RPS for an e2e POST endpoint that does write batching to postgres (committing the insert before responding with the db generated id). Postgres, client (vegeta[1]), and the app all on the same machine. I think that was with keep-alive, I think like 256 clients for the basic responder and 1024 for the one that writes to the db. There's a recently merged PR for zio-http that does 1M req/s on whatever machine they test on[2] so Netty can absolutely scale to high RPS.

[0] https://github.com/zio/zio-http

[1] https://github.com/tsenart/vegeta

[2] https://github.com/zio/zio-http/pull/1659

Yep! https://github.com/zio/zio-http

I was looking at HTTP frameworks for Scala. I found zio-http, https://zio.github.io/zio-http/. Has anyone tried this framework?

https://github.com/dream11/zio-http very simple and super performant, dead easy to abstract over routes to make a router

I'm starting a new project, essentially a standard web app (SPA + rest api). I'd like to stay as functional as possible. I'm debating between http4s + cats effect, http4s + zio, and zio-http (https://github.com/dream11/zio-http). I'm having a hard time figuring out which stack has the strongest (safest?) future especially with scala 3 out. Cats Effect 3 looks amazing, but so does the zio ecosystem. Thanks for any opinions/advice!