Beego vs CodeBehind
When comparing Beego vs CodeBehind, the Slant community recommends Beego for most people. In the question“What are the best backend web frameworks?” Beego is ranked 18th while CodeBehind is ranked 36th. The most important reason people chose Beego is:
Beego is a "batteries included" web framework, which means that a lot of features already come out of the box. This way you don't have to spend time and find third-party libraries to integrate to the framework for most of the tasks you need to complete.
Specs
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
Pro No need to find and install external libraries
Beego is a "batteries included" web framework, which means that a lot of features already come out of the box. This way you don't have to spend time and find third-party libraries to integrate to the framework for most of the tasks you need to complete.
Pro Built-in tool which watches for changes
Beego has a built-in tool which watches the code for changes. This tool (called bee tool) can be configured to run any task once the code changes. It can run tests or reload and rebuild the whole project.
Pro Built in ORM
Beego's eloquent ORM is a simple and fast Object-Relational Mapping which helps with organizing the application's database. Beego examples and documentation all use the beego ORM. No need to learn to use and integrate another ORMs API.
Pro Captcha
Pro Auto testing
Pro Modern
CodeBehind is a modern framework with revolutionary ideas.
Pro Code-Behind
Code-Behind pattern will be fully respected.
Pro Under .NET Core
Your project will still be under ASP.NET Core and you will benefit from all the benefits of .NET Core.
Pro Get output
You can call the output of the aspx page in another aspx page and modify its output.
Pro Modular
It is modular. Just copy the new project files, including dll and aspx, into the current active project.
Pro Simple
Developing with CodeBehind is very simple. You can use mvc pattern or model-view or controller-view or only view.
Pro Fast
The CodeBehind framework is faster than the default structure of cshtml pages in ASP.NET Core.
Cons
Con Very opinionated
Con Very opinionated
Con Non-idiomatic code
Con Builds may fail silently
Sometimes even though a build has failed, the pages will still render. Apparently it caches a previous build when the current one has a problem. This can be a frustrating though because it leaves you wondering why the page you are working on stopped working out of the blue.