> I'm not sure there's anything "impossible" about how small this is. You don't really need a lot of lines of code to support routes, request and response and nothing else. If anything, 765 lines of code for this is quite a lot.

How do you explain why virtually all frameworks end up requiring an order of magnitude more LoC?

▲

iLoveOncall 5 days ago | parent [-]

Because they support a lot more features?

I made a similar "framework" in PHP years back as an experiment and it was a couple hundred lines AT MOST.

▲

motorest 5 days ago | parent [-]

> Because they support a lot more features?

Not necessarily. For example, some minimal web frameworks actually provide multiple routing strategies because different implementation strategy have tradeoffs.

▲

bdhcuidbebe 5 days ago | parent [-]

Not meaning to be pedantic, but supporting multiple routing strategies is textbook ”more features”.

▲

motorest 4 days ago | parent [-]

Are they, though? I mean, is it a feature to make something usable? If you have hard performance constraints and you know what routes you need to suppport, a generic but prohibitively expensive routing strategy can prevent you from using the framework.

	▲	bdhcuidbebe 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		> I mean, is it a feature to make something usable? In your own example, having multiple ways of declaring routing is not required to be considered usable. So, yes.