goji

Negroni is from the creator of Martini, Goji is apparently high in antioxidants, but I'm partial to Macaron.

If you're defining all your routes in a single goroutine before calling goji.

For example the graceful http server termination aspect (where goji shuts the listen socket down but services the remaining connections), why not contribute that?

I ended up using Goji for my most recent API and really like the feel.

Wondering why appContext was used instead of goji's Context/environment object?

I'm a fan of goji and more recently have been using Gin [0].

I think that's what Goji is doing with these power transistors.

When I see things like Goji, my frustrations are not at goji (again, I poorly expressed that in my initial statement - sorry) but rather at the fact that the initial ramp up period as described above is so inefficient.

In any event, I do have a long plane trip coming up, and I'm sure Goji will grow itself something at least slightly more efficient than a linear scan then.

There is an obvious solution here--radix trees--and maybe if I get bored I'll implement one for Goji, but I think the API guarantees and conceptual simplicity Goji provides are more important (all routes are attempted, one after another, until a matching route is found).

So TL;DR, Goji chose standardization and composability in the design of its context object over application type safety, but if you're willing to write a few helper functions I don't think you end up losing the type safety anyways.

I've been playing around a fair bit with Goji and gocraft/web over the last week and enjoy both their approaches, and may end up porting over a gorilla/* + net/http project to get some sanity out of my middleware and request context.

Adding to the general confusion, Go doesn't manage canonical package paths, so github.com/zenazn/goji/main.go is in the package "goji" and github.com/zenazn/goji/graceful/[asterisk].go are in the package "graceful", but those package names only mean something to the importer.

On the other hand, you can provide a standard "universal" context type like Goji does.

Gorrila (through Gorilla Context), stretchr's Goweb, Goji and others provide a `map[string]inteface{}.` Okay, so I still lose the type system, but now I have to litter my code with a ton of `realValue, ok:= myMap["myValue"].(myType)`.

> Gorilla (through Gorilla Context), stretchr's Goweb, Goji and others provide a `map[string]inteface{}.` Okay, so I still lose the type system, but now I have to litter my code with a ton of `realValue, ok:= myMap["myValue"].(myType)`.

Even if I choose to optimize Goji's router, Goji's routing semantics will not change.

Goji's context is a request context, and only exists for the lifetime of the request.

Request contexts like Goji's (or gorilla/context) are best used for passing short-lived data between middleware/handlers.