python-live-gui VS liveviews

Looks super cool! Clearly an idea that people want - I built something similar to this almost two year ago [1] but your project is a lot more fleshed out. I like that you actually used websockets instead of my hacky approach of using an http stream.

[1] https://gitlab.com/BenWiser/python-live-gui

Hey all,

Wanted to re-share my framework now that it has reached v1.0.

https://gitlab.com/BenWiser/python-live-gui

I’m promising stability for the API but there’s still a lot more I’d like to get done.

I built this for a very specific use case I have of wanting a remote based application.

I specifically use this for communicating with a raspberry pi.

It’s quite a nice quick way of working. Hopefully the form upload gives a better idea of how you can use this:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31679945

I'm happy to officially mark it as version 1.0.0 and to enforce backwards compatibility.

https://gitlab.com/BenWiser/python-live-gui

There is still a lot I want to get done but I'm also eagre to hopefully start getting feature requests.

The goal of this project is to make it really easy for me to throw a GUI together for remote applications. Hopefully that scratches an itch for some of you as well.

This demo showing how you can save form data shows the kind of usecases I use this for:

python-live-gui – A simple python immediate mode gui that renders out to the Web

Show HN: Python Live GUI – A Hybrid of Dear ImGUI and Phoenix LiveView\ (5 comments)

If you want to try the liveview approach but not ready to work with Elixir / Erlang / Beam runtime, you can use liveview in 17 popular languages (Java / C# / Javascript / Typescript / PHP / Python, e.t.c.).

https://github.com/liveviews/liveviews

Below are introduction directly quoted from this list:

> This is a list of libraries for creating web applications that handle user interaction with the DOM on the server. These libraries take a different approach from older server-driven browser UIs that simulated a desktop GUI toolkit. They do not lock the developer into working with predefined components; most operate at the level of HTML (DOM) rather than GUI widgets.

> The list strives to be complete rather than awesome. You may see libraries that are not maintained or ready for production.

This approach allows you to handle business logics on the server, and update the screen in browser from the server as well.

[1] https://github.com/liveviews/liveviews

That's a conflation. I'm certain for at least some, the choice is more about using a single language than avoiding JS. I'm sure there are people using htmx who use a JS backend. There are at least 5 LiveView clones for JS for instance: https://github.com/liveviews/liveviews#javascripttypescript

Nuxt, Next, SvelteKit, Phoenix(Elixr), Blazor, and various liveview-likes are popular full stack frameworks. So, although many devs are becoming specialized, there certainly still are full stack developers with demand enough to strongly support several frameworks.

The list is seeking a maintainer. https://github.com/liveviews/liveviews/issues/23

> "different" platform with it's own unique patterns and quirks

Everything OP listed was a criticism directed at LiveView, the 'Live App' functionality, not Phoenix, the web framework. Live Apps are not exclusive to Phoenix either, as there are now imitators for every other web framework now, which at least speaks to its broader appeal amongst developers. So the criticism could be leveled towards the far less mature 'Live App' libraries on PHP/Python/JS/C# and so on and on:

https://github.com/liveviews/liveviews

However there are two ways you can do this server side: 1. Use a tool similar to live view: https://github.com/dbohdan/liveviews