This is for Sean specifically, but hopefully this will clear some things up for other people
I would argue that Pedestal is perhaps objectively simpler than Ring. I would also add it's more performant, more flexible, and more secure (by default). In Pedestal, everything is an interceptor - a record that has `:enter`, `:leave`, and `:error` actions/functions (there is no distinction between handlers and middleware). Interceptors take a context (a map that holds the `:request` and `:response`), and returns a context. Requests and Responses are exactly the same as they are in Ring. As soon as a `:response` is present in the context, it's returned through the interceptor chain (sent to the client and processing is stopped). If you want to go async, your interceptor returns a core.async channel (instead of a context), which will eventually receive a context. Your response bodies can be just about anything, including NIO things (byte-buffers, etc.). Everything in Pedestal is programmed against a protocol, allowing you to extend every piece of the system to fit your application. By default, Pedestal uses secure headers, CSRF protection, and a host of other best-practices for secure web services. You know how everything works in Pedestal. Release notes are very detailed: https://github.com/pedestal/pedestal/releases Cheers, Paul -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
