Small is beautifull: CherryPy

Today, I decided to write a new webapp (this will be out soon). I have been off since a while in the webapp developpement, so it’s a bit hard to start this new project.

I decided to look on recent Quixote’s developpement on Alinea. I first used the same components.. after 2 hours.. nothing works :

  • issues with session management, not really hard to fix
  • big trouble with _q_traversal, _q_index .. I really hate this stuff. I don’t really understand why quixote have a so complicated framework.

After 2 hours, I switched to something more friendly: CherryPy in 10 minutes I have the base working. I really like the way you can use medusa or mod_scgi in Quixote, but Webware, CherryPy, Zope have some simple components for sessions, and url handling: And this is so hard in Quixote :(

Related Posts

14 thoughts on “Small is beautifull: CherryPy

  1. cherrypy and kid template and sarissa javascript library !!
    highly recomended.

  2. Well the good thing is that CherryPy doesn’t force you to use a specific template language. So for instance, I use XSLT thanks to 4suite :)

    XML powa! ;)

  3. I’ve recently been trying to decide on a web framework to try out. SkunkWEB, Quixote, Webware, Nevow… I keep coming back to CherryPy since it seems to make more sense to me. 

  4. For me the quick challengers:

    • Quixote: because it support lot of deployement without thread issues.
    • Webware: because it is light speed and simple
    • SkunkWeb: no fork for me
    • CherryPy: because version 2.0 fix the 1.0 API

    Which one to choose ? All :)

  5. You should also check out Subway — a python port of "Ruby On Rails".

  6. Come on, cherrypy in production environment? Grow up… Cherrypy+Cheetah=probably the most headaching unholy hackful team ever ;)

  7. I don’t care about production issue in this case. But i’ve heard a lot a good things about cherrypy in production. I think that most python framework has the same issue in fact.

    For Cheetah, I feel really happy with. I know there is a lot of fancy_hype templating system. But I think most are too restrictive or to conceptual.

    Bye Bye

  8. rsz: If you’re saying no way to CherryPy in production, then what is your proposed alternative? I’ve been putting Zope sites and apps into production for the past few years, and I’m looking for something lighter weight where the framework doesn’t get in my way. What about CherryPy doesn’t meet the grade? I’m also eval’ing Aquarium.

  9. In fact, some posts says that CherryPy isn’t ready for production. I’ve done severall tests.. And I think this isn’t worst than Webware or Quixote in production in fact. Not the Zope strength and robustness but I haven’t seen a glitch even on really loaded tests..

    So for me, it’s enought too be ready for production..

  10. rsz : Though I agree that CherryPy ain’t Zope or Twisted in terms of rubustness, it doesn’t promise that either. But for an average load (I mean a busy web site but no slashdot eh!) i’s perfectly OK.

    But I’m sure with such a great comment, you must have plenty of real cases examples to show us CP ain’t worth the shot.


  11. Just to dispell any FUD, the new WSGI server I added to CherryPy now makes it certainly production ready.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>