Xamarin.Forms(.NET Standard)调用Restful API最优库选型咨询（性能优先）

Hey there! Let’s break down your options clearly, focusing on performance first since that’s your core priority.

Microsoft’s Native Http Libraries (HttpClient + System.Net.Http.Json) #

• Performance: This is the gold standard for raw performance. Since it’s built directly into the .NET ecosystem, there’s no extra overhead from third-party abstractions. Pairing HttpClient with System.Net.Http.Json (which uses the high-performance System.Text.Json serializer) eliminates the need for external JSON libraries, keeping serialization/deserialization fast and efficient. Also, using HttpClientFactory (native to .NET) helps manage HttpClient instances properly, avoiding common issues like socket leaks that can hurt long-term performance.
• Pros: Full compatibility with Xamarin.Forms (.NET Standard), long-term official support, minimal package footprint, seamless integration with .NET’s dependency injection system.
• Cons: Requires writing more boilerplate code (manual request setup, response handling) compared to third-party libraries—no fancy syntax sugar here.

Refit #

• Performance: Refit is essentially a code generator that wraps HttpClient, so its performance is almost identical to the native stack. It supports both System.Text.Json and Newtonsoft.Json, so if you stick with System.Text.Json, you’re getting the same fast serialization as the native approach. The overhead from the proxy generation is negligible for most apps.
• Pros: Super clean syntax using interface definitions (e.g., [Get("/api/users/{userId}")] Task<User> GetUserAsync(int userId);), drastically reduces boilerplate, great DI support, active community maintenance, and regular updates.
• Cons: Minor learning curve for its attribute-based API definitions, but it’s straightforward once you get the hang of it.

RestSharp #

• Performance: Older versions of RestSharp had their own HTTP client and serialization logic, which was slower than the native stack. However, recent versions (v107+) have switched to using HttpClient under the hood and support configurable serializers like System.Text.Json. That said, it still has a bit more abstraction overhead than native or Refit, so performance is slightly worse in head-to-head tests.
• Pros: Intuitive, imperative API design (e.g., client.AddJsonBody(user)), built-in support for various authentication methods, and extensive documentation.
• Cons: Has some historical baggage (old vs. new API differences), larger package size than native/Refit, and the extra abstraction layer adds minor performance cost.

PortableRest #

• Performance: This library is largely unmaintained now, relying on older serialization (Newtonsoft.Json by default) and HTTP handling. Its performance lags behind the native stack and modern third-party libraries, and there’s a risk of compatibility issues with newer Xamarin.Forms or .NET Standard versions.
• Pros: Was designed for cross-platform use early on, but those benefits are now covered by native tools.
• Cons: Stagnant development, potential compatibility gaps, and no real performance advantage over modern alternatives—not recommended for new projects.

Final Recommendation #

• Top pick for performance: Go with Microsoft’s native HttpClient + System.Net.Http.Json. It’s the fastest, most reliable option with zero third-party dependencies.
• Best balance of performance and productivity: If you want to cut down on boilerplate without sacrificing much speed, Refit is your best bet. It’s almost as fast as native but lets you define your API in a clean, maintainable way.
• RestSharp: Use this if you prefer a more imperative API style and don’t mind the minor performance hit.
• PortableRest: Avoid this for new projects—its lack of maintenance makes it a risky choice.

内容的提问来源于stack exchange，提问作者Developer