click VS Gooey

Context: "click" - "Command Line Interface Creation Kit" - easily create CLIs from Python code, via adding decorators: https://github.com/pallets/click

"click-web" in turn turns the click CLI app into a web app with one line of code.

there is also click, it is more straight forward and also nice to keep the relevant code where the code is. https://github.com/pallets/click/

I don't have huge experience with Python, but I used async code with C#/Typescript and lately I had to use some asyncio magic.

I found this article: https://blog.dalibo.com/2022/09/12/monitoring-python-subproc... and while async/await syntax is the same, it's not entirely clear for me, why there's some event loop and what exactly happens, when I pass function to asyncio.run(), like here: https://github.com/pallets/click/issues/85#issuecomment-5034...

So, you can use it and it's not that hard, but there are some parts that are vague for me, no matter which language implements async support.

Hmm… did you try such approaches, as [click](https://github.com/pallets/click) or[tap](https://github.com/swansonk14/typed-argument-parser)?

This app leverages these powerful libraries: - yt-dlp: video downloader - moviepy: video trimmer/merger - click: CLI app creator - rich / rich-click: CLI app styler

I've used click [1] a lot to build Python tooling scripts the past few years. Click usage is "sort of" similar to the author's proposed solution. There's also a small section here [2] that describes some of the issues covered in the article (in context of argparse).

[1] - https://github.com/pallets/click

I think the success of Arduino in the hardware world can be explained in a similar way, as the relative success of "command line app frameworks" like Click[1], or even much lighter-weight libraries like argparse[2]. You absolutely can get away with using just getopt[3] (and people experienced with it will likely strongly prefer it). However certain factors such as a more declarative API, a nice logo, the existence of an ecosystem (even if you're not actively drawing from it), an official "branded" forum, etc can all play into picking a more complex solution, with more baggage you don't need, certain oddities that may throw users off, etc.

[1]: https://click.palletsprojects.com/

[2]: https://docs.python.org/3/library/argparse.html

[3]: https://man.openbsd.org/getopt.3, https://linux.die.net/man/3/getopt

Exactly! You can also use a library like click (https://github.com/pallets/click) to help take care of the command line side, while you focus on the 'business logic' of your application :)

The name conflicts with a similar python module that allows one to turn any Python console program into a GUI with one line.

https://github.com/chriskiehl/Gooey

Hey! Cool project! I have a question: why do you dump out sys.argv to a local file in the CWD? [0] tmp.txt is hardly a unique name… or am I missing something and this never triggers?

[0] https://github.com/chriskiehl/Gooey/blob/be4b11b8f27f500e732...

This might be of interest to you:

> Gooey - Turn (almost) any Python 3 Console Program into a GUI application with one line

https://github.com/chriskiehl/Gooey

I love gooey: https://github.com/chriskiehl/Gooey

It allows me to quickly slap a GUI on an existing script that accepts command-line-arguments. In the end, I get the best of both world: Discoverability from the GUI, automation through the script, and automatic feature parity between the two.

Downside: Control over the GUI layout is basic, and only "standard" GUI features work, but I never felt limited when using it.

similar for local/individual usage:

https://github.com/chriskiehl/Gooey - take a python-CLI, make a TK-windows

and then probably even simple dashboarding like streamlit.

Like Gooey?

As for how I'd handle it, I would probably combine both into one command-line program, with all filepaths using pathlib and letting argparse handle the options. That way you could optionally generate a GUI with gooey with little extra effort, although this would also add a dependency.