search
HomeBackend DevelopmentGolangHow I write Go APIs in my experience with Fuego

How I write Go APIs in  my experience with Fuego

My Experience Building Go APIs with Fuego

As a Go developer with several years of experience, I've explored various web frameworks. My journey included the standard library, Gin, and Fiber. While each has merits, I often found myself needing more structure or spending excessive time integrating multiple libraries for validation, serialization, and documentation. That's where Fuego changed the game.

Initially, Fuego seemed like just another framework. However, its use of modern Go features, particularly generics, to automatically generate OpenAPI specifications directly from code, intrigued me. I decided to test it on a small internal project, and here's my honest account.


First Impressions

Fuego's simplicity was immediately apparent. Setting up a basic server took mere minutes:

package main

import "github.com/go-fuego/fuego"

func main() {
    s := fuego.NewServer()
    fuego.Get(s, "/", func(c fuego.ContextNoBody) (string, error) {
        return "Hello, World!", nil
    })
    s.Run()
}

The familiarity was striking—similar to Gin, but with built-in OpenAPI support.


A Real-World Example

The "Hello World" example doesn't reflect real-world complexities. My application required JSON data handling, validation, and typed responses. Other frameworks necessitate custom JSON decoding, error handling, and middleware integration. Fuego streamlined this considerably using typed route handlers.

Here's a simplified route handler:

type UserInput struct {
    Name string `json:"name" validate:"required"`
}

type UserOutput struct {
    Message string `json:"message"`
}

func main() {
    s := fuego.NewServer()
    fuego.Post(s, "/user", handleUser)
    s.Run()
}

func handleUser(c fuego.ContextWithBody[UserInput]) (UserOutput, error) {
    in, err := c.Body()
    if err != nil {
        return UserOutput{}, err
    }
    return UserOutput{Message: "Hello, " + in.Name}, nil
}

Key improvements:

  1. Typed Handlers: fuego.ContextWithBody[UserInput] automatically deserializes JSON into the UserInput struct.
  2. Validation: validate:"required" ensures the Name field is present; Fuego handles errors gracefully.
  3. Responses: Returning a UserOutput struct automatically serializes it to JSON.

This eliminated significant boilerplate code—no json.Unmarshal, external validation libraries, or custom error handling.


Why Fuego Stands Out

  1. Native Go Feel: Unlike frameworks that heavily wrap net/http, Fuego feels remarkably native. It utilizes net/http directly, allowing seamless integration of standard middleware and handlers. I reused existing authentication middleware without issues.

  2. Automatic OpenAPI Generation: I previously managed separate YAML files or relied on comments for OpenAPI specs, a tedious and error-prone process. Fuego automatically generates the spec from route handler types, ensuring documentation always stays current.

  3. Validation and Error Handling: The integrated validation (using go-playground/validator) was intuitive, and error handling was simplified. Invalid UserInput structs resulted in structured error messages adhering to RFC standards.


Data Transformations

To ensure all incoming Name fields were lowercase, I leveraged Fuego's InTransform method:

package main

import "github.com/go-fuego/fuego"

func main() {
    s := fuego.NewServer()
    fuego.Get(s, "/", func(c fuego.ContextNoBody) (string, error) {
        return "Hello, World!", nil
    })
    s.Run()
}

This automatically transforms data before reaching the route handler.


Challenges Encountered

  1. Smaller Ecosystem: Fuego's smaller user base compared to Gin or Echo resulted in fewer readily available community resources. However, the repository's examples and documentation proved sufficient.

  2. Limited Built-in Middleware: While Fuego provides some middleware, it's not as extensive as some older frameworks. net/http compatibility allowed using external libraries or custom middleware.


Conclusion

Fuego offers a compelling balance of convenience and flexibility. It accelerates API development with built-in validation, serialization, and documentation generation, while remaining true to Go's principles. Using typed structs and letting Fuego manage the rest significantly improved my workflow.

Key benefits:

  • Increased Productivity: Cleaner code and reduced boilerplate.
  • Automated Documentation: Always up-to-date OpenAPI specifications.
  • Smooth Transitions: Easy integration with existing net/http handlers.

If you're seeking a modern, flexible Go framework, especially if you're weary of manual OpenAPI maintenance, I strongly recommend Fuego. It simplified my development process while staying true to Go's minimalist philosophy. The GitHub repository provides comprehensive information and a promising roadmap. I'm enthusiastic about its future and will continue using it for future projects.

The above is the detailed content of How I write Go APIs in my experience with Fuego. For more information, please follow other related articles on the PHP Chinese website!

Statement
The content of this article is voluntarily contributed by netizens, and the copyright belongs to the original author. This site does not assume corresponding legal responsibility. If you find any content suspected of plagiarism or infringement, please contact admin@php.cn
Choosing Between Golang and Python: The Right Fit for Your ProjectChoosing Between Golang and Python: The Right Fit for Your ProjectApr 19, 2025 am 12:21 AM

Golangisidealforperformance-criticalapplicationsandconcurrentprogramming,whilePythonexcelsindatascience,rapidprototyping,andversatility.1)Forhigh-performanceneeds,chooseGolangduetoitsefficiencyandconcurrencyfeatures.2)Fordata-drivenprojects,Pythonisp

Golang: Concurrency and Performance in ActionGolang: Concurrency and Performance in ActionApr 19, 2025 am 12:20 AM

Golang achieves efficient concurrency through goroutine and channel: 1.goroutine is a lightweight thread, started with the go keyword; 2.channel is used for secure communication between goroutines to avoid race conditions; 3. The usage example shows basic and advanced usage; 4. Common errors include deadlocks and data competition, which can be detected by gorun-race; 5. Performance optimization suggests reducing the use of channel, reasonably setting the number of goroutines, and using sync.Pool to manage memory.

Golang vs. Python: Which Language Should You Learn?Golang vs. Python: Which Language Should You Learn?Apr 19, 2025 am 12:20 AM

Golang is more suitable for system programming and high concurrency applications, while Python is more suitable for data science and rapid development. 1) Golang is developed by Google, statically typing, emphasizing simplicity and efficiency, and is suitable for high concurrency scenarios. 2) Python is created by Guidovan Rossum, dynamically typed, concise syntax, wide application, suitable for beginners and data processing.

Golang vs. Python: Performance and ScalabilityGolang vs. Python: Performance and ScalabilityApr 19, 2025 am 12:18 AM

Golang is better than Python in terms of performance and scalability. 1) Golang's compilation-type characteristics and efficient concurrency model make it perform well in high concurrency scenarios. 2) Python, as an interpreted language, executes slowly, but can optimize performance through tools such as Cython.

Golang vs. Other Languages: A ComparisonGolang vs. Other Languages: A ComparisonApr 19, 2025 am 12:11 AM

Go language has unique advantages in concurrent programming, performance, learning curve, etc.: 1. Concurrent programming is realized through goroutine and channel, which is lightweight and efficient. 2. The compilation speed is fast and the operation performance is close to that of C language. 3. The grammar is concise, the learning curve is smooth, and the ecosystem is rich.

Golang and Python: Understanding the DifferencesGolang and Python: Understanding the DifferencesApr 18, 2025 am 12:21 AM

The main differences between Golang and Python are concurrency models, type systems, performance and execution speed. 1. Golang uses the CSP model, which is suitable for high concurrent tasks; Python relies on multi-threading and GIL, which is suitable for I/O-intensive tasks. 2. Golang is a static type, and Python is a dynamic type. 3. Golang compiled language execution speed is fast, and Python interpreted language development is fast.

Golang vs. C  : Assessing the Speed DifferenceGolang vs. C : Assessing the Speed DifferenceApr 18, 2025 am 12:20 AM

Golang is usually slower than C, but Golang has more advantages in concurrent programming and development efficiency: 1) Golang's garbage collection and concurrency model makes it perform well in high concurrency scenarios; 2) C obtains higher performance through manual memory management and hardware optimization, but has higher development complexity.

Golang: A Key Language for Cloud Computing and DevOpsGolang: A Key Language for Cloud Computing and DevOpsApr 18, 2025 am 12:18 AM

Golang is widely used in cloud computing and DevOps, and its advantages lie in simplicity, efficiency and concurrent programming capabilities. 1) In cloud computing, Golang efficiently handles concurrent requests through goroutine and channel mechanisms. 2) In DevOps, Golang's fast compilation and cross-platform features make it the first choice for automation tools.

See all articles

Hot AI Tools

Undresser.AI Undress

Undresser.AI Undress

AI-powered app for creating realistic nude photos

AI Clothes Remover

AI Clothes Remover

Online AI tool for removing clothes from photos.

Undress AI Tool

Undress AI Tool

Undress images for free

Clothoff.io

Clothoff.io

AI clothes remover

Video Face Swap

Video Face Swap

Swap faces in any video effortlessly with our completely free AI face swap tool!

Hot Tools

EditPlus Chinese cracked version

EditPlus Chinese cracked version

Small size, syntax highlighting, does not support code prompt function

PhpStorm Mac version

PhpStorm Mac version

The latest (2018.2.1) professional PHP integrated development tool

Zend Studio 13.0.1

Zend Studio 13.0.1

Powerful PHP integrated development environment

WebStorm Mac version

WebStorm Mac version

Useful JavaScript development tools

MantisBT

MantisBT

Mantis is an easy-to-deploy web-based defect tracking tool designed to aid in product defect tracking. It requires PHP, MySQL and a web server. Check out our demo and hosting services.