<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Microframeworks on Gaurav.dev</title><link>/tags/microframeworks/</link><description>Recent content in Microframeworks on Gaurav.dev</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-US</language><copyright>© 2026 Gaurav. Built with care and clean code.</copyright><lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="/tags/microframeworks/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Flask, FastAPI, or Bottle: Choosing a Python Microframework</title><link>/posts/flask-fastapi-bottle-python-api/</link><pubDate>Fri, 24 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>/posts/flask-fastapi-bottle-python-api/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;Python gives API teams an unusual amount of choice. Flask, FastAPI, and Bottle can all expose an HTTP endpoint in a few lines, but they optimise for different kinds of simplicity. Choosing well means looking beyond the first route and asking how the service will be validated, tested, deployed, and changed.&lt;/p&gt;&#10;&lt;h2 id="flask-flexible-and-proven"&gt;Flask: flexible and proven&lt;/h2&gt;&#10;&lt;p&gt;Flask is the dependable general-purpose option. Its request model is easy to understand, its extension ecosystem is mature, and experienced Python developers can recognise a Flask application quickly. It works especially well for internal tools, integration services, conventional REST APIs, and products that need freedom without inventing the entire HTTP layer.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item><item><title>Express, Koa, or Hono for Your Next TypeScript API?</title><link>/posts/express-koa-hono-typescript-api/</link><pubDate>Sat, 18 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>/posts/express-koa-hono-typescript-api/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;Express shaped the Node.js API ecosystem. Koa refined its middleware model, while Hono brought a compact, standards-oriented approach to edge and multi-runtime applications. All three can serve a TypeScript API, but their strengths appear under different constraints.&lt;/p&gt;&#10;&lt;h2 id="express-optimise-for-familiarity"&gt;Express: optimise for familiarity&lt;/h2&gt;&#10;&lt;p&gt;Express remains the lowest-risk choice when hiring reach, middleware availability, and compatibility dominate the decision. Its programming model is widely understood, integrations are plentiful, and almost every hosting platform can run it without explanation.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item><item><title>Sinatra or Roda: Small Ruby APIs With Clear Boundaries</title><link>/posts/sinatra-roda-ruby-api/</link><pubDate>Mon, 06 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>/posts/sinatra-roda-ruby-api/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;Ruby is often associated with a full Rails application, but it is equally capable of powering compact services. Sinatra and Roda keep the HTTP layer small while preserving Ruby’s strength: code that communicates intent clearly.&lt;/p&gt;&#10;&lt;h2 id="sinatra-direct-and-approachable"&gt;Sinatra: direct and approachable&lt;/h2&gt;&#10;&lt;p&gt;Sinatra maps naturally from an HTTP verb and path to a block of behaviour. That directness makes it productive for prototypes, internal utilities, webhook handlers, and small APIs. A developer can read a short Sinatra application from top to bottom and understand its public surface quickly.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>