cppcms-users

[Cppcms-users] Comparison to boost::beast

[<jo...@em...>]

Hello folks!

 

I’ve been working with boost::beast for the last year. This is basically a boost-based library built on top of boost::asio to provide HTTP and websocket functionalities.

I was curious about CppCMS and played around with it a little for a few days.

The gist of this paragraph: I am new to CppCMS and mildly familiar working with boost::beast.

 

I would be interested to hear from the CppCMS community where you see advantages of using CppCMS over boost::beast for building a collaboration-tool website.

Unlike CppCMS, boost::beast does not provide a template engine/mechanism nor does it provide higher-level features such as utility classes for forms etc.

These are of course very valuable assets but I am wondering how much effort it is to build something like that on boost::beast vs. relying on a different library I am currently largely unfamiliar with.

Are there any features that CppCMS provides that you would deem essential or “hard to roll yourself” for building something like a collaboration platform?

I see that there is a CppDb library to interface databases. However, I would be using that as we own a license for SQLAPI++ and we’re fairly familiar working with that.

 

Maybe some of you even know boost::beast and can provide more detailed insights.

 

I understand that this is an open question. I am really looking for opinions and experiences here – not necessarily only technical facts.

 

Thank you for your efforts.

 

 

Best regards,

~ Joel Bodenmann

Re: [Cppcms-users] Comparison to boost::beast

[Artyom B. <art...@gm...>]

Beast is very low level library. It is build around heavily templated
library Boost.Asio.
As an example I remember you need to compile templated code to make it work
with SSL and basic HTTP.
Also It misses basic things like sessions, form validation security
framework etc.

CppCMS provides much higher level api and both synchronous and asynchronous
paradigms
I'm Boost developer. Boost.Locale and Boost.Nowide were taken from CppCMS.
I voted No for Beast during the review but I was in minority

Artyom


On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 3:47 AM <jo...@em...> wrote:

> Hello folks!
>
>
>
> I’ve been working with boost::beast for the last year. This is basically a
> boost-based library built on top of boost::asio to provide HTTP and
> websocket functionalities.
>
> I was curious about CppCMS and played around with it a little for a few
> days.
>
> The gist of this paragraph: I am new to CppCMS and mildly familiar working
> with boost::beast.
>
>
>
> I would be interested to hear from the CppCMS community where you see
> advantages of using CppCMS over boost::beast for building a
> collaboration-tool website.
>
> Unlike CppCMS, boost::beast does not provide a template engine/mechanism
> nor does it provide higher-level features such as utility classes for forms
> etc.
>
> These are of course very valuable assets but I am wondering how much
> effort it is to build something like that on boost::beast vs. relying on a
> different library I am currently largely unfamiliar with.
>
> Are there any features that CppCMS provides that you would deem essential
> or “hard to roll yourself” for building something like a collaboration
> platform?
>
> I see that there is a CppDb library to interface databases. However, I
> would be using that as we own a license for SQLAPI++ and we’re fairly
> familiar working with that.
>
>
>
> Maybe some of you even know boost::beast and can provide more detailed
> insights.
>
>
>
> I understand that this is an open question. I am really looking for
> opinions and experiences here – not necessarily only technical facts.
>
>
>
> Thank you for your efforts.
>
>
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> ~ Joel Bodenmann
> _______________________________________________
> Cppcms-users mailing list
> Cpp...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cppcms-users
>