GHGhotiFish·Jul 5, 2013
I like go's anti-magic philosophy, if not simply because of how utterly hard I've being burned by magic.
routing is best left to you to write explicitly, there's no pancea, because if you use this solution and you then need to do something even slightly more complicated, then you now have two nomenclatures, and two interacting systems.
A simple library is what is needed for parameter parsing and validation, not a framework that provides it wholesale.
There are lots of session implementations, a library might intice you with its offerins, not a frameworks im pretty sure this one size fits all solution should work in some manner
Templating was already there, they offer it again? There's also competing libraries to go's templating, use those.
Caching? You mean for templates? That's not complicated to do. For databases? There are databases th
Read the rest
at need you to cache results for them? Sheash.
job running? Oh good were cron now, why not this? http://godoc.org/github.com/robfig/cron
a testing framework? Doesn't go have one of those? Why do we need two? Go's got a good testing framework!
Internationalization is templates with file reading, right?
I know these all sound hard, they sound like you can't do them on your own, or they sound tedious. But for the love of god, down with frameworks, down with magic! Burn it all!