|
|
|
|
|
|
by seanmcelroy
4682 days ago
|
|
|
The article title is pretty misleading. NancyFX looks very succinct, but it solves much smaller scope of problem than ASP.NET MVC does. The only notable comparison he makes between NancyFX and ASP.NET MVC is routing -- while the level of indirection in the RouteManager and the folder structure conventions of the default one provided in ASP.NET MVC, the purpose of that is to give enterprise applications an extensibility point. If you don't need all the ways you can customize ASP.NET MVC, sure go with a simpler framework. But there's nothing "doing it wrong" about using ASP.NET MVC if you need the services it provides. |
|
|
No its not.
"If you don't need all the ways you can customize ASP.NET MVC"
Nancy is pluggable at pretty much any point. You don't like the way routing works in Nancy, plug it. Don't like the base module, plug it.
Nancy is far more extensible than WebAPI or MVC.
Having said that, anything you can do in WebAPI / MVC you can do in Nancy, and anything you can do in Nancy, you can do in WebAPI / MVC
Nancy just has a nicer API.