karax VS application

The frontend uses Karax, which is my favorite frontend/SPA library. It is an absolute joy to use, even if it's a bit rough around the edges.

https://github.com/karaxnim/karax

I have used Nim for personal projects for 6 years now and it continues to surprise me on how well versed it is for many problem domains. I am fond of it's SPA framework, karax https://github.com/karaxnim/karax for which I wrote a translation utility https://github.com/nim-lang-cn/html2karax Latest Nimv2 release candidate has improved in the ergonomics and syntax that affect compilation to js, so I was able to cleanup my webapp's code to be less verbose. On GPU programming there has been a few projects that touch GPU programming, most notably https://github.com/treeform/shady

And it's present not only in Python but in other languages as well. Check for example https://github.com/karaxnim/karax - I don't know why people would want to hide all of their HTML in Python/whatever language. Then limit their ability to script and style it in one way or another.

> the real killer feature to me is the javascript target

Agree, this is amazing because you can share code and data structures between front and backend (for example: https://github.com/karaxnim/karax).

Also, it's really nice having high level stuff like metaprogramming and static typing spanning both targets. Things like reading a spec file and generating statically checked APIs for server/client is straightforward, which opens up a lot of possibilities.

E.g. Nim focuses on enabling what it calls "single page web apps": https://github.com/karaxnim/karax.

Karax [1] being Nim's SPA framework that also supports server side rendering.

[1]: https://github.com/karaxnim/karax

I recommend you to take a look at Karax. It's a front-end framework for Nim that can compile to regular JavaScript. If you want to know how to use it with a webserver, Joker is a good example. With the Joker config, all of the compiled .js files land in /public/views, where you can take a look at them. But keep in mind that the JS that Nim produces is often rather cumbersome and hundreds of lines long, even if it's just a simple program.

You could use Budget with Buckets. It's free to use, but you can get a license too. Downside: it doesn't have an app (well, it does, but it's read only and sucks big time).

I use buckets https://www.budgetwithbuckets.com/

I track my balances across various sources, updating once a month. I also set my outgoings.

Funnily enough I don't really use the buckets feature too much, simply the graph over time of savings, and ability to set goals / monthly costs for review is enough.

Right now I'm testing software called Buckets, and I am liking it so far. It's a one-time payment, and the dev seems pretty cool by offering an extremely generous demo. It's kind of a hybrid between manual and automatic, with some macro import options and statement import options that can be helpful. It also has the option to import financial data automatically using SimpleFin for only a fraction of the monthly price of YNAB and Aspire. So far I'm really liking it.

Buckets - I just started to look at this app. It is very basic from what I have seen so far. And while writing this I learned the iOS app is a closed beta. Unlimited FREE trial until you determine it works for you. After that, there is a one-time fee of $49. In September the price is going up to $64.

You might look into budget with buckets

I haven't used it, but the team (person?) that makes [Buckets](https://www.budgetwithbuckets.com) makes [SimpleFIN](https://www.simplefin.org), which seems like it exposes exactly what you want: simple transaction data from arbitrary banks.

Plaid offers [transactions APIs](https://plaid.com/products/transactions/), but I guess to your point these APIs are geared towards fintech companies, not personal use.

I’ve been happy with Budget with Buckets as a YNAB alternative - https://www.budgetwithbuckets.com/