On Wednesday, February 6, 2019 at 1:27:18 AM UTC-8, Eric Pascual wrote: > > Hi Derek, > > but I have never seen anyone refer to it as a "lightweight" project > (before you, that is). > > I didn't meant "Django *is* lightweight" but "Django *can be* > lightweight", implied you configure it accordingly. >
To be clear, I'm talking about stock Django. Out of the box, Django is already lightweight for all practical intents and purposes. I've *never* encountered a problem with startup time, memory usage, or speed due to Django itself. I don't need to remove the ORM or tweak the template layer or anything else. Out of the box, Django is already fast. Therefore, I cannot seem to find a use case that makes Flask worth all of the additional dev time that it requires worth it. > What really matters is : "will the job be done ?". Yep. And quickly. In execution time, there is no metric I care about where "Flask wins" but in development time, stock Django is way ahead of Flask. > > I agree that what could be added in Django documentation is a section > explaining how to strip its default application setting down to the minimal > stuff for equating solutions such as Flask, > No need. Django doesn't need to be stripped down - it's already plenty fast for virtually every web project. Even the smallest ones. But as small projects grow into large/complex ones, Django has your back while Flask does not. ./s -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/django-users. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-users/8652bc68-3857-4d91-a3ba-8868ec63f636%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
