nitro VS tauri

Looks similar to Nitro https://nitro.h2o.ai/ and Wave https://wave.h2o.ai/ - both open source. Nitro already works with WebAssembly via Pyodide. (Author here)

Does PyScript offer anything of significance over and above what Pyodide already offers, other than several py-* tags?

In my experience, it's trivial accomplish this with Pyodide.

Here's a web worker that hosts Pyodide and loads packages, PyPI wheels, external modules, etc. and launches type=text/python script tags in-browser:

https://github.com/h2oai/nitro/blob/main/web/public/nitride....

About ~100 lines of code.

I miss RAD tools too. Visual Basic was hugely popular two decades ago. The ease of building GUIs was unparalleled. That experience carried over to some extent with Windows Forms, WPF, Adobe Flex, etc., but not quite the same.

A decent blend of RAD and visual programming is the Max/MSP that ships with Ableton Live. It's fairly straightforward to build little audio/MIDI devices, then switch to visual programming for the implementation (objects/patchcords/control in Max terms).

> Doing GUIs only in code is tedious and boring.

Totally. But given that most GUI software these days involves client/server, I'm not sure if there's a simpler solution.

I work on Nitro[1] these days, and it's an attempt to make GUI development simpler and less tedious, primarily by trying to abstract away client/server programming and opting for a simpler way to program UIs without dealing with callbacks or event-handlers.

[1] https://github.com/h2oai/nitro

Hi, dear Tauri! Long time no see. I published my first post, Developing a Desktop Application via Rust and NextJS. The Tauri Way almost a year ago. Since then, Tauri has become stronger. I'm happy about that! And now, I am very pleased to make a useful contribution to the Tauri community. As a full-stack developer, I frequently face situations where I need to start a DB-based UI project as fast as possible. It's stressful if I need to start the project from 100% scratch. I prefer to keep some boilerplates on hand, which will save me time and nerves and will be the subject of this article.

Hey Thanks!

Just electron & vite. I might actually migrate off electron, Tauri (https://tauri.app/) seems to be getting more stable and it's gotten great reviews.

I think this is the boilerplate I used though https://github.com/cawa-93/vite-electron-builder.

Well the great thing about WebAssembly is that you can port QT or anything else to be at a layer below -- thanks to WebAssembly Interface Types[0] and the Component Model specification that works underneath that.

To over-simplify, the Component Model manages language interop, and WIT constrains the boundaries with interfaces.

IMO the problem here is defining a 90% solution for most window, tab, button, etc management, then building embeddings in QT, Flutter/Skia, and other lower level engines. Getting a good cross-platform way of doing data passing, triggering re-renders, serializing window state is probably the meat of the interesting work.

On top of that, you really need great UX. This is normally where projects fall short -- why should I use this solution instead of something like Tauri[2] which is excellent or Electron?

[0]: https://github.com/WebAssembly/component-model/blob/main/des...

[1]: https://github.com/WebAssembly/component-model/blob/main/des...

[2]: https://tauri.app/

Welcome to the 2nd episode of our series “Building with Tauri”, where we chat with developers who build amazing projects and products using Tauri.

Tauri seemed like the "thing" I should switch to because everybody loves Rust (heh), and because it ships significantly smaller apps.

First of all, I will be using npm as my package manager but feel free to use whatever you prefer. Find more info here.

Today I'm talking about Tauri! Do you know all the various tools that allow you to develop native applications starting from web languages? They often need an intermediate compilation, in the middle of which you end up encountering various problems not always transparent and directly solvable with a language mostly detached from native development. On the other hand, there's still the ease of developing attractive and easily usable interfaces, which are more difficult to develop with low level languages.