proxygen

Pros of cpprestsdk

• Cross-platform support (Windows, Linux, macOS, iOS, Android)
• Extensive documentation and examples
• Built-in support for JSON parsing and manipulation

Cons of cpprestsdk

• Heavier dependency on Boost libraries
• Less focus on high-performance, low-latency scenarios
• Smaller community and fewer contributors compared to Proxygen

Code Comparison

cpprestsdk:

#include <cpprest/http_client.h>

http_client client(U("http://example.com"));
client.request(methods::GET, U("/api/data"))
    .then([](http_response response) {
        // Handle response
    });

Proxygen:

#include <proxygen/httpserver/HTTPServer.h>

HTTPServerOptions options;
options.threads = 4;
HTTPServer server(std::move(options));
server.bind({"0.0.0.0", 8080});
server.start();

Both libraries provide HTTP functionality, but cpprestsdk focuses on client-side operations with a more high-level API, while Proxygen offers lower-level server-side control with a focus on performance. cpprestsdk is better suited for cross-platform applications requiring HTTP client capabilities, while Proxygen excels in building high-performance HTTP servers and proxies.

Pros of http-parser

• Lightweight and focused on HTTP parsing
• Widely used and battle-tested in Node.js ecosystem
• Easy to integrate into C/C++ projects

Cons of http-parser

• Limited to HTTP parsing only, not a full server framework
• Less actively maintained compared to Proxygen
• Fewer features for modern HTTP protocols (e.g., HTTP/2, HTTP/3)

Code Comparison

http-parser:

http_parser_settings settings;
settings.on_url = on_url_callback;
settings.on_header_field = on_header_field_callback;
http_parser_init(&parser, HTTP_REQUEST);
http_parser_execute(&parser, &settings, buffer, length);

Proxygen:

class MyHandler : public proxygen::RequestHandler {
  void onRequest(std::unique_ptr<proxygen::HTTPMessage> headers) noexcept override {
    // Handle request
  }
};

Key Differences

• Proxygen is a full-featured HTTP server framework, while http-parser focuses solely on parsing
• http-parser is more lightweight and easier to integrate into existing projects
• Proxygen offers more advanced features like HTTP/2 support and asynchronous processing
• http-parser has a simpler API, while Proxygen provides a more comprehensive set of tools

Use Cases

• http-parser: Ideal for projects needing basic HTTP parsing functionality
• Proxygen: Better suited for building high-performance HTTP servers with modern protocol support

Pros of cpp-httplib

• Lightweight and header-only library, easy to integrate into projects
• Simple API, making it straightforward to use for basic HTTP server/client needs
• Cross-platform compatibility (Windows, macOS, Linux)

Cons of cpp-httplib

• Limited performance compared to Proxygen for high-concurrency scenarios
• Fewer advanced features and customization options
• Less suitable for large-scale, enterprise-level applications

Code Comparison

cpp-httplib:

#include <httplib.h>

int main() {
    httplib::Server svr;
    svr.Get("/", [](const httplib::Request&, httplib::Response& res) {
        res.set_content("Hello, World!", "text/plain");
    });
    svr.listen("localhost", 8080);
}

Proxygen:

#include <proxygen/httpserver/HTTPServer.h>

int main() {
    proxygen::HTTPServerOptions options;
    options.threads = 0;
    options.idleTimeout = std::chrono::milliseconds(60000);
    options.shutdownOn = {SIGINT, SIGTERM};
    proxygen::HTTPServer server(std::move(options));
    server.bind({{folly::SocketAddress("localhost", 8080, true)}});
    server.start();
}

Both libraries provide HTTP server functionality, but Proxygen offers more advanced features and configuration options, while cpp-httplib focuses on simplicity and ease of use.

Pros of uWebSockets

• Lightweight and efficient, with lower memory footprint
• Supports WebSocket compression out of the box
• Easier to set up and use for simple WebSocket applications

Cons of uWebSockets

• Less feature-rich compared to Proxygen's comprehensive HTTP stack
• Limited to WebSocket and HTTP protocols
• Smaller community and ecosystem

Code Comparison

uWebSockets:

uWS::Hub h;
h.onMessage([](uWS::WebSocket<uWS::SERVER> *ws, char *message, size_t length, uWS::OpCode opCode) {
    ws->send(message, length, opCode);
});
h.listen(3000);
h.run();

Proxygen:

class EchoHandler : public proxygen::RequestHandler {
  void onBody(std::unique_ptr<folly::IOBuf> body) noexcept override {
    responseBody_.append(std::move(body));
  }
  void onEOM() noexcept override {
    ResponseBuilder(downstream_).body(std::move(responseBody_)).sendWithEOM();
  }
};

Summary

uWebSockets is a lightweight and efficient WebSocket library, ideal for simple WebSocket applications. It offers easy setup and built-in compression support. However, it lacks the comprehensive feature set of Proxygen, which provides a full HTTP stack and is backed by Facebook's resources. Proxygen offers more flexibility for complex HTTP-based applications but may have a steeper learning curve and higher resource usage.

Pros of awesome-cpp

• Comprehensive resource for C++ libraries, frameworks, and tools
• Regularly updated with community contributions
• Covers a wide range of C++ topics and use cases

Cons of awesome-cpp

• Not a functional codebase, primarily a curated list
• Lacks specific implementation details or performance metrics
• May include outdated or less maintained projects

Code comparison

While a direct code comparison isn't relevant due to the nature of these repositories, here's a brief example of how they differ:

awesome-cpp:

## Networking

* [ACE](https://www.dre.vanderbilt.edu/~schmidt/ACE.html) - An OO Network Programming Toolkit in C++.
* [Boost.Asio](https://think-async.com/Asio/) - A cross-platform C++ library for network and low-level I/O programming.

proxygen:

#include <proxygen/httpserver/HTTPServer.h>
#include <proxygen/httpserver/RequestHandlerFactory.h>

using namespace proxygen;

int main(int argc, char* argv[]) {
  HTTPServerOptions options;
  options.threads = 0;
  options.idleTimeout = std::chrono::milliseconds(60000);
  // ... (additional setup)
}

awesome-cpp serves as a directory of C++ resources, while proxygen provides a functional HTTP server implementation.

Pros of Gumbo-parser

• Lightweight and focused on HTML5 parsing
• Easy to integrate into existing C/C++ projects
• Designed for high performance and low memory usage

Cons of Gumbo-parser

• Limited scope compared to Proxygen's full HTTP stack
• Less active development and community support
• Lacks advanced features like HTTP/2 support

Code Comparison

Gumbo-parser (parsing HTML):

GumboOutput* output = gumbo_parse("<h1>Hello, World!</h1>");
GumboNode* root = output->root;
// Process the parsed HTML tree
gumbo_destroy_output(&kGumboDefaultOptions, output);

Proxygen (handling HTTP requests):

void MyHandler::onRequest(std::unique_ptr<HTTPMessage> headers) noexcept {
  ResponseBuilder(downstream_)
    .status(200, "OK")
    .body("Hello, World!")
    .sendWithEOM();
}

Gumbo-parser focuses on HTML parsing, while Proxygen provides a comprehensive HTTP server framework. Gumbo-parser is more suitable for projects requiring HTML processing, whereas Proxygen is better for building full-featured web servers and services.