For backend web dev, there are advantages. I really like Axum's use of typing:
pub async fn dataset_stats_handler(
Path(dataset_id): Path<String>,
Query(verbose): Query<bool>,
) -> impl IntoResponse {
...
}
With a route like: .route("/datasets/{dataset_id}/stats", get(dataset_stats_handler))
…the "dataset_id" path variable is parsed straight into the dataset_id arg, and a query string "verbose" is parsed into a boolean. Super convenient compared to Go, and you type validation along with it.Many other things to like: The absence of context.Context, the fact that handlers can just return the response data, etc.
What I don't like: Async.
The Go standard library has learned to interpret path variables as well:
A project I work at uses a similar pattern (similar from what I can see):
func Login(req LoginRequest, cookies Cookies, db *sql.DB) (LoginResponse, error) {
...
}
router.HandleFunc("POST /signup", fw.Wrap(Login))
It's just a wrapper.It also serializes/deserializes responses and handles both JSON and templates.
db is just a singleton-lifetime dependency, we often also have ctx, http.Request, http.Response, Cookie, which are request-time lifetimes.
I thought about open-sourcing it but most Golang developers seem to hate it with a passion, so I just gave up, haha.
You can not use async right? Maybe not with axum but I imagine there are fully blocking frameworks for rust.
go is slightly more verbose (surprise) but you can achieve the same thing using struct binding in gin:
This is actually a great example - what happens in that Rust version when the input parsing fails? Go makes it explicit.