Gin Gonic vs Iris: What are the differences?

Introduction:

Gin Gonic and Iris are both popular web frameworks for building web applications in Go. While they have some similarities, there are several key differences that set them apart. In this markdown, we will explore six of these differences in detail.

1. Router Implementation:

Gin Gonic uses a fast and flexible httprouter library for router implementation. This allows for efficient routing and handling of HTTP requests. On the other hand, Iris utilizes its own homemade router called Radix, which is inspired by httprouter but with additional features like dynamic path parameters and subdomains.

2. Middleware Support:

Gin Gonic provides a built-in middleware support, allowing developers to easily chain middleware functions and achieve modular code structure. It comes with a variety of middleware options, including logging, recovery, and authentication. In contrast, Iris takes a slightly different approach by offering a single-handler middleware that allows developers to define middleware functions outside of the main handler function, resulting in better performance.

3. Performance:

Both frameworks are known for their high performance, but Iris claims to outperform other Go web frameworks, including Gin Gonic, by utilizing a highly optimized router, request's lifecycle management, and an event-driven design. Benchmark tests have shown that Iris can handle more requests per second when compared to Gin Gonic.

4. Error Handling:

Gin Gonic has a simple error handling mechanism where errors are logged, and a default 500 internal server error page is displayed. However, Iris provides a more advanced error handling capability where developers can handle specific types of errors differently, allowing for better control and customization. Iris also supports error wrapping, which means that the original error along with additional context can be displayed, making it easier to debug issues.

5. Templating Engine:

Gin Gonic relies on external template engines like HTML/template or pug for rendering dynamic HTML pages. On the other hand, Iris comes with its own integrated and fast template engine called Ace, which offers a clean syntax and supports both server-side and client-side rendering. Ace also provides features like template inheritance, macros, and custom template functions, making it more powerful and flexible compared to Gin Gonic's approach.

6. Websocket Support:

While both frameworks have support for Websockets, Iris claims to have a more advanced and feature-rich implementation. Iris provides dedicated features like middleware chain, handler function design, message readers, and writer pools specifically tailored for handling Websockets. This makes Iris a better choice for applications that heavily rely on real-time communication.

In summary, Gin Gonic and Iris differ in router implementation, middleware support, performance, error handling, templating engine, and websocket support. Depending on the specific requirements of your project, one framework may be better suited than the other.