Pros of Quarkus

• Faster startup time and lower memory footprint
• Native compilation support for improved performance
• Simplified configuration and developer experience

Cons of Quarkus

• Smaller ecosystem and community compared to Spring Framework
• Less mature and fewer production-proven use cases
• Limited support for certain enterprise features

Code Comparison

Spring Framework:

@RestController
public class HelloController {
    @GetMapping("/hello")
    public String hello() {
        return "Hello, Spring!";
    }
}

Quarkus:

@Path("/hello")
public class HelloResource {
    @GET
    @Produces(MediaType.TEXT_PLAIN)
    public String hello() {
        return "Hello, Quarkus!";
    }
}

Both frameworks offer similar functionality for creating RESTful endpoints, but Quarkus uses JAX-RS annotations while Spring Framework uses its own annotations. Quarkus tends to have a more streamlined approach, focusing on simplicity and performance optimization. Spring Framework, being more mature, offers a wider range of features and integrations out of the box, but may require more configuration and setup for certain use cases.

Pros of Micronaut Core

• Faster startup time and lower memory footprint due to compile-time dependency injection
• Built-in support for serverless and microservices architectures
• Native cloud support with integrations for various cloud platforms

Cons of Micronaut Core

• Smaller ecosystem and community compared to Spring Framework
• Less extensive documentation and learning resources
• Fewer third-party libraries and integrations available

Code Comparison

Spring Framework:

@RestController
public class HelloController {
    @GetMapping("/hello")
    public String hello() {
        return "Hello, World!";
    }
}

Micronaut Core:

@Controller("/hello")
public class HelloController {
    @Get
    public String hello() {
        return "Hello, World!";
    }
}

Both frameworks use similar annotation-based approaches for defining controllers and endpoints. However, Micronaut's annotations are more concise and specific to HTTP methods. Spring Framework's annotations are more versatile and can be used across different Spring projects.

Micronaut Core focuses on reducing reflection usage and optimizing startup time, while Spring Framework offers a more comprehensive set of features and integrations for enterprise applications. The choice between the two depends on project requirements, team expertise, and performance considerations.

Pros of Vert.x

• Lightweight and high-performance, with a small footprint
• Non-blocking, event-driven architecture for better scalability
• Polyglot support, allowing development in multiple programming languages

Cons of Vert.x

• Smaller ecosystem and community compared to Spring Framework
• Steeper learning curve for developers accustomed to traditional blocking models
• Less comprehensive out-of-the-box features and integrations

Code Comparison

Spring Framework:

@RestController
public class HelloController {
    @GetMapping("/hello")
    public String hello() {
        return "Hello, World!";
    }
}

Vert.x:

public class HelloVerticle extends AbstractVerticle {
    @Override
    public void start() {
        vertx.createHttpServer().requestHandler(req -> {
            req.response().end("Hello, World!");
        }).listen(8080);
    }
}

Both frameworks offer ways to create web applications, but Vert.x focuses on a more reactive, non-blocking approach. Spring Framework provides a more comprehensive set of features and follows a more traditional MVC pattern, while Vert.x offers a lightweight, event-driven model that can be beneficial for high-concurrency scenarios.

Pros of Javalin

• Lightweight and simple, with a minimal learning curve
• Fast startup time and low memory footprint
• Designed for microservices and modern web applications

Cons of Javalin

• Less comprehensive ecosystem compared to Spring Framework
• Limited built-in features for enterprise-level applications
• Smaller community and fewer third-party integrations

Code Comparison

Javalin:

import io.javalin.Javalin;

public class HelloWorld {
    public static void main(String[] args) {
        Javalin app = Javalin.create().start(7000);
        app.get("/", ctx -> ctx.result("Hello World"));
    }
}

Spring Framework:

import org.springframework.boot.SpringApplication;
import org.springframework.boot.autoconfigure.SpringBootApplication;
import org.springframework.web.bind.annotation.GetMapping;
import org.springframework.web.bind.annotation.RestController;

@SpringBootApplication
@RestController
public class HelloWorld {
    public static void main(String[] args) {
        SpringApplication.run(HelloWorld.class, args);
    }

    @GetMapping("/")
    public String hello() {
        return "Hello World";
    }
}

The code comparison demonstrates the simplicity of Javalin compared to Spring Framework. Javalin requires fewer annotations and less boilerplate code to set up a basic web application, while Spring Framework offers a more structured approach with built-in dependency injection and configuration.

Pros of Dropwizard

• Lightweight and opinionated framework, easier to get started quickly
• Built-in support for metrics, health checks, and operational tools
• Designed for RESTful web services, with a focus on simplicity

Cons of Dropwizard

• Less flexible and customizable compared to Spring Framework
• Smaller ecosystem and community support
• Limited to specific versions of libraries, which may not always be the latest

Code Comparison

Spring Framework:

@RestController
public class HelloController {
    @GetMapping("/hello")
    public String hello() {
        return "Hello, World!";
    }
}

Dropwizard:

public class HelloResource {
    @GET
    @Path("/hello")
    public String hello() {
        return "Hello, World!";
    }
}

Summary

Spring Framework is a comprehensive, highly flexible framework with a vast ecosystem, suitable for various application types. Dropwizard, on the other hand, is a more focused, opinionated framework specifically designed for building RESTful web services with simplicity in mind. While Spring Framework offers more customization options and a larger community, Dropwizard provides a streamlined approach with built-in operational tools, making it easier to get started quickly for certain types of projects.