Hacker News Reader

I've used Martini a bit and also tried some of the other frameworks (beego and revel) and I really don't see what makes people call Martini especially non-Gooey in comparison.

The reality is, when your language is as weak as Go (in terms of advanced features), a framework with any sort of significant features will be quite dynamic and "magic".

View on HN

Except that's obviously not the case, considering he just announced Negroni, an idiomatic ("non-magical") library that provides the key feature of Martini.

...which has even less features than Martini.

Because it doesn't need them. There are more polished versions of those features elsewhere, and they can be composed easily with Negroni as they all use the same interfaces.

I thought your point was about the necessity of magic in a web framework. The most magical thing about Martini was its dependency injection approach, which Negroni provides in an idiomatic way.

Unless you're saying that it's the magic that makes a framework a framework, as opposed to just a collection of libraries. That makes sense, because the magical approach of Martini (for example) does, in a sense, lock you in to using Martini. This makes it more like the monolithic web frameworks you mention.

Did you try comparing any of those to stdlib? I didn't hear people claiming that any of those you listed is idiomatic Go.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com