When comparing Play Framework vs Falcon, the Slant community recommends Play Framework for most people. In the question“What are the best web frameworks to create a web REST API?” Play Framework is ranked 20th while Falcon is ranked 25th. The most important reason people chose Play Framework is:
It's like Java, but more Haskell-y.
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
It's like Java, but more Haskell-y.
Pro Asynchronous Core
Pro Interoperable with Java
Pro Good documentation and a great community
Play has quite a large community which provides numerous tutorials and videos related to developing with Play.
The Play official documentation covers many things, such as the framework itself but also specific stuff such as Akka, SBT and Netty.
There are also many big companies that base their main sites around Play, one of them is LinkedIn which provides third-party documentation on a regular basis.
Pro Play is an extensive ecosystem
Play uses Akka for concurrency, Scala for a templating engine, Netty as a client-server framework and SBT (Simple Build Tool) for building. And they all come out of the box.
Play also comes with the option to scaffold your applications. Play is an all-embracing ecosystem designed to increase developer productivity and shorten development times.
Pro Simple for beginners
Play is very simple to get started. The documentation is very helpful for beginners and advanced users alike and the official website has a great "Getting Started" tutorial to begin developing with Play.
Pro Readable code
Play framework's convention over configuration methodology makes most Play projects have a very similar structure. This means that the code written for the framework is very readable. This enables a developer to switch between applications without having to relearn the ecosystem for every project. The built-in templating system also helps with code and makes it possible to have a very low count of lines of code.
Pro Can use Java, one of the most widely known languages
Java is one of the most widely known languages, so people coming from that background can jump right in and not have to learn a new language syntax.
Pro Good Websocket Support
Pro Built to build REST APIs
Falcon is designed entirely around building REST APIs. It achieves this helps a lot with it being lightweight and simple. It also helps developers take some design choices which would otherwise not be possible with a more general-purpose framework,
Pro Lightweight with minimal dependencies
Falcon is a very lightweight framework. This can be noticed simply by looking at the dependency list: other than the python standard library, six and mimeparse are the only dependencies.
Pro Performance is really awesome
Con Backward incompatibility
The jump from Play 1 to Play 2.x caused a lot of confusion. While it is important to have some kind of evolution, sometimes it causes backward incompatibility which can create some problems. It makes tutorials or modules made for the old version obsolete. This can make it hard for beginners to find useful resources. The template engine which used Groovy now uses Scala.
Con Not as many resources to learn
Other languages and frameworks have countless tutorials, books, moocs, etc. Java and Play does not have nearly as much.
Con Limited in scope
Being designed around building REST APIs and the fact that it's minimalistic with very few dependencies makes Falcon opinionated (you should build a REST API) and limited in scope (you shouldn't be using Falcon to build a news site, blog or ecommerce platform).