richardolsson

React is a component based UI framework, so I find it natural that common components that might exist in some other framework need to be re-created for React.

IMO, the fact that React components can be easily shared with an interface that follows a common pattern is a major strength of React, rather than a weakness.

The biggest reason would be that you're building a REST API and you want something tailored for that use case. If you're not building a REST API (but instead for example a web site serving HTML and whatnot), you shouldn't use Falcon at all.

This might not be clear on the Falcon framework home page though, and I will let the maintainer know it might be a good idea to clarify this point.

Django is a "web framework", for creating web sites. Falcon is a "REST API" framework, for creating APIs following the REST pattern. Flask is less clear (or "opinionated") as to what it should be used for, and would probably fall somewhere in between the other two.

If you are at any point returning HTML from your Falcon project or thinking of serving static content, you should probably not be using Falcon at all. :)

I've recently started using Falcon, and also contributed some code to it (e.g. an even faster router which generates and compiles python code representing the URI tree).

The main benefit for me, and the reason why I chose Falcon over other frameworks, is that Falcon is entirely designed around the task of creating REST APIs. You wouldn't use it to create a blog or news site or whatever. You would perhaps use it to create an API backend for any of those though.

This makes it light-weight, and also opens the possibility for some design decisions that would not work in a more general purpose type of framework.

In that regard, Falcon is definitely more opinionated than other frameworks (it's opinion being that you should build REST APIs), but in others, such as choice of response encoder, storage et c, it's not.