nicegui VS Tailwind CSS

I was looking at this space and nicegui seemed like the best ootb experience.

https://nicegui.io/

Dash is similar in spirit, as a "build web UIs with Python" framework. Dash seems more similar to nicegui (https://nicegui.io) architecturally than to Hyperdiv. Like nicegui, it builds a static dom that is then mutated via callbacks or data bindings.

By contrast, Hyperdiv lays out UI declaratively based on state, and when state changes, the app re-runs, generating an updated UI. Streamlit and Hyperdiv seem to work similarly, though I'm not sure how Streamlit handles state and state-based layout.

For native GUI, DearPyGui[0] as modern as you can.

For browser web-based GUI, you can use nicegui[1]

[0] -- https://github.com/hoffstadt/DearPyGui

[1] -- https://github.com/zauberzeug/nicegui

I want to bring to attention a set of frameworks that make webdevelopment using Python simple and fun. The popular opinion maybe that webpages developed with Python maybe slow. But this is not the case. Do checkout https://github.com/ofjustpy/ofjustpy/, https://github.com/zauberzeug/nicegui/ and https://github.com/justpy-org/justpy . All these frameworks are build on top of Starlette and make web development really easy. If you want simple and ready to use the nicegui is the choice. If you want fast, scalable, and more control then give ofjustpy a try.

Yes, NiceGUI aims for a very gentle learning curve. Coming from Streamlit I suspect your main adaptation will be that in NiceGUI you need to write valid Python code. Streamlit constantly reevaluates your script which feels nice and easy but creates lots of problems down the road. See https://github.com/zauberzeug/nicegui/discussions/21.

Auth is a big limitation. It's not a built-in component, they have [an example](https://github.com/zauberzeug/nicegui/blob/main/examples/aut...) using the FastAPI layer for auth, but I haven't had time the time to try implementing it. It's definitely not something you get out of the box with NiceGUI.

For scaling, I am viewing it mostly as an internal tool builder. I wouldn't recommend it for external applications. So as far as scaling an internal app I think it works fine. [Their website](https://nicegui.io) is built with NiceGUI, and it works fine, but you can feel the lag occasionally on some of their larger demo pages.

Well, I was at PyCon Ireland last weekend and I missed the NiceGUI talk. I hear postive things about it and anything shiney and anything frontend-related always catches my attention (although I admit talking to a friend when I missed this talk was just as fun, and it was worth it).

Finally, for our front end, we’re going to be pairing Next.js with the great combination of TailwindCSS and shadcn/ui so we can focus on building the functionality of the app and let them handle making it look awesome!

You can use any frontend framework you want — react-based tooling, however, has a natural advantage as it models everything as a function of state, which can map 1:1 with the concept in Burr. In the demo app we use react, react-query, and tailwind, but we’ll be skipping over this largely (it is not central to the purpose of the post).

Tailwind CSS: A utility-first CSS framework for rapidly building custom designs.

First, you need to make sure that you have a working Tailwind CSS project…

Tailwind CSS

With better CSS approaches like TailwindCSS and Vanilla Extract (which we're heavily using) it's much easier to maintain the UI and make sure it doesn't change unexpectedly. No more conflicting CSS classes, much less CSS specificity issues and much less CSS code in general.

This app was built with Svelte Kit, Tailwind CSS, and many other technologies. For a full rundown, please visit the GitHub repository

Unlike Tailwind, which has over 77,000 stars on GitHub, Mojo CSS has about 200 stars on GitHub. But the Mojo CSS documentation is fairly good and you can find most of the information you’ll need there.

JavaScript React Flowbite Tailwind Firebase - Auth, Database, and Hosting Vite

- Performance is a feature.

Another common interpretation of brutalism is aesthetic, reacting to overly complicated user interfaces by creating simpler, more direct ones. Tailwind CSS (https://tailwindcss.com), one of today's most popular CSS libraries, promotes this approach in its component examples. There's also a neat library I've seen recently called "Neobrutalism Components" for React that I like (https://neobrutalism-components.vercel.app), providing components with a similar look and feel to Gumroad. This might more accurately be called 'Neo-Brutalism,' as noted in the comments.

A more engineering-centric interpretation of Brutalism focuses on form, structure, and efficiency, drawing significantly from brutalist architecture principles. Apart from the user interface itself, most mobile, desktop, and web applications are extremely bloated and often perform worse than sites from 10 years ago did. While one HTML file might be "less brutalist" than the original HN site, it is substantially more brutalist than any HN mobile app in existence, and offers nearly identical functionality.

A broader interpretation of brutalism, which could be termed 'Meta-Brutalism,' is embodied in the overall experience on this site through UX flows. Yes, in the strictest sense, the original HN site is more Brutalist in many ways, but it only shows 30 articles at a time and does not function as a PWA. For this site, the experience of reading 10 stories is arguably less brutalist, but for quickly browsing through several pages and skimming articles (which is how I read HN) it is a lot faster, and in my opinion, more Brutalist.

My primary inspiration was addressing software and tool bloat in UIs rather than strictly adhering to every principle set forth by David Bryant Copeland. I don't find it convincing that this site "isn't brutalist" compared to really any other experience apart from the Main HN site, and I would argue the overall experience is more brutalist in its performance and scrolling behavior.

As a side note: I generally don't like Brutalist architecture that much although I believe it is unfairly maligned. I visited the Salk Institute once and enjoyed it though (https://www.archdaily.com/61288/ad-classics-salk-institute-l...).