You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Diesel uses native drivers by default and it may take some effort for you to replace it with a pure Rust driver. Each side has their pros and cons, so it's up to your preference.
Diesel-async provides pure rust drivers for all backends but SQLite.
You can also do dynamic queries with Diesel, but you'd lose some of the benefits of compile-time type-checking.
That's just not correct. All dynamic queries build with diesel's query DSL are also checked at compile time
While in the Diesel ecosystem there are awesome libraries like barrel,
Barrel is deprecated for a long while, instead there is now a built-in schema management tool in diesel's CLI (for more than a year now…)
SeaORM is very new.
I think you can drop the "very new" classification here and instead also call yourself well established.
Additionally I personally feel that this part sounds a bit misleading, given that diesel-async now also exists for several years:
First off, perhaps the number one requested feature, async Rust support. While using async may not offer you better performance today, programming in async is an architectural decision you have to make early on. By choosing SeaORM, we together look forward to Rust's async ecosystem maturing.
(To be clear here it's technically not wrong, it just make it sound like you cannot use diesel in an async context)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
The Compare with Diesel page on your webpage is heavily outdated.
The following points are not correct (anymore):
Diesel-async provides pure rust drivers for all backends but SQLite.
That's just not correct. All dynamic queries build with diesel's query DSL are also checked at compile time
Barrel is deprecated for a long while, instead there is now a built-in schema management tool in diesel's CLI (for more than a year now…)
I think you can drop the "very new" classification here and instead also call yourself well established.
Additionally I personally feel that this part sounds a bit misleading, given that
diesel-async
now also exists for several years:(To be clear here it's technically not wrong, it just make it sound like you cannot use diesel in an async context)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: