tapir VS FrameworkBenchmarks

You're not confined to the usual suggestions below (play, http4s). There's a ton of options. (I wrote test cases using a bunch of different frameworks a few years ago at https://github.com/hohonuuli/msdemos). Having written services using a variety of frameworks in production, I would strongly suggest using one that auto-generates API docs (openapi, swagger) for you. That will save you a huge amount of time later on. For heavier services, like the one at https://fathomnet.org/, I tend to the Java side (Quarkus is my current top choice, but Micronaut and Helidon are both great). For everything else I use Scala. My go-to right now is tapir using a vertx backend. See https://tapir.softwaremill.com/

Tapir is a Scala framework. (which runs on the JDK) Since the recent release of version 1.0, it's become my go to for many projects. It doens't provide much in the way of integrations with 3rd party frameworks, but I actually prefer that. It does autogenerate great swagger docs though.

I do wonder where the recommendation to use http4s for beginners came from. http4s is a very capable library (and if you care much about composition it is excellent), but I wouldn't describe the documentation as beginner friendly.

A slightly better starting point for scala 3 + type-safe server building is tapir e.g. https://github.com/softwaremill/tapir/blob/master/examples3/... . With that, you get a declarative definition of your endpoints (+ error types, auth, etc.) that you can use for both servers and clients, which comes very handy when writing integration tests of course.

> absolutely ridiculous the fetishization of extremely complex FP and type-level hacking that goes on in the ecosystem

An alternative way to look at it is that there is a lot of essential domain complexity that gets encoded via the type system to let the compiler do the hard work. That "extremely complex FP" does not arrive out of nowhere - I really recommend at least skimming through the slides from rossabaker, the http4s designer, that motivate where the core type signature comes from https://rossabaker.github.io/boston-http4s/#2

I suppose one of the "features" that I like about the (typelevel) community is that the approach of "worse is better" is not taken, and a lot of effort is expended to make things correct, modular and orthogonal. This has the drawback of increased upfront complexity, that anecdotally pays off the moment your compiler does not error and the program runs as intended.

Did you try tapir? There is a module for deploying aws lambda with Scala js. Not sure whether it is compatible with Scala 3, I am sticking with Scala 2 until Scala 3 gets more mature.

I'm aware, but it's a design decision that was made on purpose, and which I find in practice not a big problem at all.

Backend is source of truth for types on frontend (backend generated OpenAPI definition with tapir, frontend takes it with orval)

In all cases I would strongly suggest to have a look at Tapir, regardless of the server implementation that you pick.

Check the infographic below, to see this tool history, functionalities and more. Make sure, to take tAPIr for a spin here and share your feedback with us in the comment section!

Tapir is awesome, and you can pick the server backend according to your preferred ecosystem (for instance http4s + doobie, Zio + Quill, Akka + Slick, ...)

Finally I would strongly recommend having a look at Tapir. Even if you don't need to share endpoints or generate OpenAPI documentation, it provides a really neat abstraction on top of http4s.

Neat. Thanks for sharing!

Interestingly, may-minihttp is faring very well in the TechEmpower benchmark [1], for whatever those benchmarks are worth. The code is also surprisingly straightforward [2].

[1] https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/

[2] https://github.com/TechEmpower/FrameworkBenchmarks/blob/mast...

ntex was formed after a schism in actix-web and Rust safety/unsafety, with ntex allowing more unsafe code for better performance.

ntex is at the top of the TechEmpower benchmarks, although those benchmarks are not apples-to-apples since each uses its own tricks: https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#hw=ph&test=fortune&s...

Ruby is slow. Very slow. How much you may ask? https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#hw=ph&test=fortune&s... fastest Ruby entry is at 272th place. Sure, top entries tend to have questionable benchmark-golfing implementations, but it gives you a good primer on the overhead imposed by Ruby.

It is also not early 00s anymore, when you pick an interpreted language, you are not getting "better productivity and tooling". In fact, most interpreted languages lag behind other major languages significantly in the form of JS/TS, Python and Ruby suffering from different woes when it comes to package management and publishing. I would say only TS/JS manages to stand apart with being tolerable, and Python sometimes too by a virtue of its popularity and the amount of information out there whenever you need to troubleshoot.

If you liked Go but felt it being a too verbose to your liking, give .NET a try. I am advocating for it here on HN mostly for fun but it is, in fact, highly underappreciated, considered unsexy and boring while it's anything but after a complete change of trajectory in the last 3-5 years. It is actually the* stack people secretly want but simply don't know about because it is bundled together with Java in the public perception.

*productive CLI tooling, high performance, works well in a really wide range of workloads from low to high level, by far the best ORM across all languages and back-end framework that is easier to work with than Node.JS while consuming 0.1x resources

Although that seems to have improved in recent years.

https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#hw=ph&test=json§...

RoR and whatever C++ based web backend there is count as a valid comparison in my book. But comparing the languages itself is maybe a bit off.

On a side note, you can actually compare their performance here if you’re really curious. But take it with a grain of salt since these are synthetic benchmarks.

https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks

Most benchmarks you'll find essentially have someone's thumb on the scale (intentionally or unintentionally). Most people won't know the different languages well enough to create comparable implementations and if you let different people create the implementations, cheating happens. The TechEmpower benchmarks aren't bad, but many implementations put their thumb on the scale (https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks). For example, a lot of the Go implementations avoid the GC by pre-allocating/reusing structs or allocate arrays knowing how big they need to be in advance (despite that being against the rules). At some point, it becomes "how many features have you turned off." Some Go http routers (like fasthttp and those built off it like Atreugo and Fiber) aren't actually correct and a lot of people in the Go community discourage their use, but they certainly top the benchmarks. Gin and Echo are usually the ones that are well-respected in the Go community.

There is certainly a lot of speculation in Techempower benchmarks and top entries can utilize questionable techniques like simply writing a byte array literal to output stream instead of constructing a response, or (in the past) DB query coalescing to work around inherent limitations of the DB in case of Fortunes or DB quries.

And yet, the fastest Ruby entry is at 274th place while Rails is at 427th.

https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#hw=ph&test=fortune&s...

oh what machine? with how many workers? doing what?

search for "node" on this page: https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r21

JustJS would like a word https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r20&tes...

In terms of RPS, this web service is more-or-less the fortunes benchmark in the techempower benchmarks, once the data hits the cache: https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r21

Or, at least, they would be after applying optimizations to them.

In short, both of these would serve more rps than you will likely ever need on even the lowest end virtual machines. The underlying API provider will probably cut you off from querying them before you run out of RPS.