Comparisons
Compare Procyon with common Go application styles.
Comparisons
Procyon sits between a minimal HTTP router and a full application platform. It keeps Go code explicit while adding a component model and runtime structure.
Compared with net/http
net/http is a standard library foundation. It is a good fit when you want full
control and only need request routing, handlers, and middleware.
Procyon adds conventions for larger applications:
| Area | net/http | Procyon |
|---|---|---|
| Routing | manual handler registration | endpoint configuration on components |
| Dependencies | wired manually | constructor injection |
| Startup | application-owned | framework-managed |
| Lifecycle | application-owned | component lifecycle hooks |
Compared with a router
Routers focus on matching requests to handlers. Procyon includes endpoint mapping, but also gives the application a component container and runtime lifecycle.
Use a router when the app is mostly HTTP handler wiring. Use Procyon when you also want component discovery, dependency wiring, lifecycle hooks, and a common application shape.
Compared with hand wiring
Hand wiring is simple at first and still a good choice for small programs. Procyon becomes useful when the dependency graph grows, when startup needs a repeatable shape, or when framework extensions should plug into the same container.