Martini vs Meteor

Overview

Martini

Stacks16

Followers37

Votes15

GitHub Stars11.6K

Forks1.1K

Meteor

Stacks1.9K

Followers1.8K

Votes1.7K

GitHub Stars44.8K

Forks5.3K

Martini vs Meteor: What are the differences?

Introduction

In this comparison, we will explore the key differences between Martini and Meteor, two popular web development frameworks.

Architecture: Martini is a lightweight web framework that provides a minimalistic and modular structure, allowing developers to have more control over their code organization. On the other hand, Meteor is a full-stack framework that comes with a built-in set of tools and capabilities for rapid application development.
Real-time Data: Meteor is known for its real-time data feature, which allows data changes to be immediately reflected across all connected clients without the need for manual syncing. Martini, on the other hand, does not have built-in support for real-time data synchronization and requires additional libraries or plugins to achieve a similar functionality.
Community Support: Meteor has a larger and more active community compared to Martini, resulting in a wealth of resources, plugins, and tutorials available for developers. Martini, being a smaller and less popular framework, may have limited community support and resources.
Performance: Martini is known for its high performance due to its lightweight nature and minimalistic design. Meteor, being a full-stack framework with a built-in set of features, may have slightly lower performance in comparison.
Learning Curve: Martini has a relatively simple and easy-to-understand architecture, making it a good choice for beginners or developers looking for a lightweight solution. In contrast, Meteor's full-stack nature and real-time capabilities may have a steeper learning curve for some developers.
Extensibility: Martini allows developers to easily extend the framework by adding custom middleware and plugins. Meteor, on the other hand, provides a more opinionated and integrated environment, which may limit the flexibility for customization and extensibility.

In Summary, Martini and Meteor differ in architecture, real-time data capabilities, community support, performance, learning curve, and extensibility.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs

CLI (Node.js)

Manual

Advice on Martini, Meteor

Carl-Erik

Jan 23, 2020

Decided

This basically came down to two things: performance on compute-heavy tasks and a need for good tooling. We used to have a Meteor based Node.js application which worked great for RAD and getting a working prototype in a short time, but we felt pains trying to scale it, especially when doing anything involving crunching data, which Node sucks at. We also had bad experience with tooling support for doing large scale refactorings in Javascript compared to the best-in-class tools available for Java (IntelliJ). Given the heavy domain and very involved logic we wanted good tooling support to be able to do great refactorings that are just not possible in Javascript. Java is an old warhorse, but it performs fantastically and we have not regretted going down this route, avoiding "enterprise" smells and going as lightweight as we can, using Jdbi instead of Persistence API, a homegrown Actor Model library for massive concurrency, etc ...

374k views374k

Comments

Detailed Comparison

Martini	Meteor
Martini is a powerful package for quickly writing modular web applications/services in Golang.	A Meteor application is a mix of JavaScript that runs inside a client web browser, JavaScript that runs on the Meteor server inside a Node.js container, and all the supporting HTML fragments, CSS rules, and static assets.
-	Pure JavaScript;Live page updates;Clean, powerful data synchronization;Latency compensation;Hot Code Pushes;Sensitive code runs in a privileged environment;Fully self-contained application bundles; Interoperability;Smart Packages
Statistics
GitHub Stars 11.6K	GitHub Stars 44.8K
GitHub Forks 1.1K	GitHub Forks 5.3K
Stacks 16	Stacks 1.9K
Followers 37	Followers 1.8K
Votes 15	Votes 1.7K
Pros & Cons
Pros 6 Go 4 Simple 2 Open source 1 Flexible Routing 1 Express/Sinatra style framework	Pros 251 Real-time 200 Full stack, one language 183 Best app dev platform available today 155 Data synchronization 152 Javascript Cons 5 Does not scale well 4 Heavily CPU bound 4 Hard to debug issues on the server-side
Integrations
Golang	AngularJS React MongoDB Node.js Apache Cordova

What are some alternatives to Martini, Meteor?

Node.js

Node.js uses an event-driven, non-blocking I/O model that makes it lightweight and efficient, perfect for data-intensive real-time applications that run across distributed devices.

Rails

Rails is a web-application framework that includes everything needed to create database-backed web applications according to the Model-View-Controller (MVC) pattern.

Django

Django is a high-level Python Web framework that encourages rapid development and clean, pragmatic design.

Laravel

It is a web application framework with expressive, elegant syntax. It attempts to take the pain out of development by easing common tasks used in the majority of web projects, such as authentication, routing, sessions, and caching.

.NET

.NET is a general purpose development platform. With .NET, you can use multiple languages, editors, and libraries to build native applications for web, mobile, desktop, gaming, and IoT for Windows, macOS, Linux, Android, and more.

ASP.NET Core

A free and open-source web framework, and higher performance than ASP.NET, developed by Microsoft and the community. It is a modular framework that runs on both the full .NET Framework, on Windows, and the cross-platform .NET Core.

Symfony

It is written with speed and flexibility in mind. It allows developers to build better and easy to maintain websites with PHP..

Spring

A key element of Spring is infrastructural support at the application level: Spring focuses on the "plumbing" of enterprise applications so that teams can focus on application-level business logic, without unnecessary ties to specific deployment environments.

Spring Boot

Spring Boot makes it easy to create stand-alone, production-grade Spring based Applications that you can "just run". We take an opinionated view of the Spring platform and third-party libraries so you can get started with minimum fuss. Most Spring Boot applications need very little Spring configuration.

Bower

Bower is a package manager for the web. It offers a generic, unopinionated solution to the problem of front-end package management, while exposing the package dependency model via an API that can be consumed by a more opinionated build stack. There are no system wide dependencies, no dependencies are shared between different apps, and the dependency tree is flat.

Related Comparisons

Bitbucket vs GitHub vs GitLab

Bootstrap vs Materialize

Django vs Laravel vs Node.js

Bootstrap vs Foundation vs Material UI

Node.js vs Spring-Boot

Martini vs Meteor: What are the differences?

Introduction

In this comparison, we will explore the key differences between Martini and Meteor, two popular web development frameworks.

Architecture: Martini is a lightweight web framework that provides a minimalistic and modular structure, allowing developers to have more control over their code organization. On the other hand, Meteor is a full-stack framework that comes with a built-in set of tools and capabilities for rapid application development.
Real-time Data: Meteor is known for its real-time data feature, which allows data changes to be immediately reflected across all connected clients without the need for manual syncing. Martini, on the other hand, does not have built-in support for real-time data synchronization and requires additional libraries or plugins to achieve a similar functionality.
Community Support: Meteor has a larger and more active community compared to Martini, resulting in a wealth of resources, plugins, and tutorials available for developers. Martini, being a smaller and less popular framework, may have limited community support and resources.
Performance: Martini is known for its high performance due to its lightweight nature and minimalistic design. Meteor, being a full-stack framework with a built-in set of features, may have slightly lower performance in comparison.
Learning Curve: Martini has a relatively simple and easy-to-understand architecture, making it a good choice for beginners or developers looking for a lightweight solution. In contrast, Meteor's full-stack nature and real-time capabilities may have a steeper learning curve for some developers.
Extensibility: Martini allows developers to easily extend the framework by adding custom middleware and plugins. Meteor, on the other hand, provides a more opinionated and integrated environment, which may limit the flexibility for customization and extensibility.

In Summary, Martini and Meteor differ in architecture, real-time data capabilities, community support, performance, learning curve, and extensibility.