typer VS httpx

I have been using Typer on every one of my CLI projects which uses Click under the hood. The documentation is fantastic, the CLI app it produces looks great and lets you create things quickly. I high recommend it.

https://typer.tiangolo.com/

Adding CLI capabilities. My preferred library here is typer.

I just heard about this but it seems to be pretty much the type of thing you want and want fast.

Docstrings are for documenting how a function/ class/ method/ module works. Often you don't need to add a docstring to your main function because no one will be importing it to use elsewhere. And if you want it to run as a CLI, then there are better ways to document the available options. For example, typer does most of it for you, or in click you add the help text to the decorator.

Most computing tasks in airflow DAGs are KubernetesPodOperator containing a CLI (Python Typer). It allows us to pass arguments easily to run DAG manually if needed (the new UI to pass arguments to DAG in airflow 2.6 is really nice). Arguments allow us to replay DAG easily (change start / end dates for instance).

So it's basically the main .gitlab-ci.yml file plus a separate Python CI app using Typer for the AWS instrumentation.

Similarly for Typer, which is literally "the FastAPI of CLIs"[1]. Handy to type your `main` parameters and have CLI argument parsing. For more complicated cases, it's a wrapper around Click.

[1] https://typer.tiangolo.com/

interesting that you hate python, but love Click. Did you try Typer which uses Click underneath?

For reference, it's a butterfly, not a moth.

Source: https://github.com/encode/httpx/issues/834

Very cool, first I'm hearing of httpx https://www.python-httpx.org/

I think most people would start with trying out requests or something for this kind of work, I'm guessing that didn't work out? You've got a star from me.

To access 10 different commands at the same time, that is tricky but definitely doable.

First thing that comes to mind, you can use aliases.

To keep it simple, lets use 3 examples instead of 10: harlequin (this project), pgcli (https://www.pgcli.com/) and httpx (https://www.python-httpx.org/)

Setup a main home for all your venvs:

    cd ~

There are already some implementations for Python HTTP clients. One of them is aiometer. But it's not suitable for my use case. Since httpx already has the internal pool, it would be better to reuse the design.

Besides, flama also provides support for SQL databases via SQLAlchemy, an SQL toolkit and Object Relational Mapper that gives application developers the full power and flexibility of SQL. Finally, flama also provides support for HTTP clients to perform requests via httpx, a next generation HTTP client for Python.

We can use the async HTTP client provided by httpx, a fully featured HTTP client for Python with an API broadly compatible with requests, so it can be used in pretty much the same way in most cases.

httpx in place of requests library

The main value of Requests is that it provided an abstract interface on top of HTTP, which was designed well-enough to become a standard. But today it has fallen way behind in its field, and there are much better alternatives such as HTTPX [0].

[0] https://www.python-httpx.org/

HTTPX is a popular Python library that provides an asynchronous HTTP client, and it can be beneficial for enabling async support in Django. While Django itself does not require HTTPX for async support, using HTTPX in combination with Django's async views can bring several advantages:

The underlying library for both sync and async is httpx (https://www.python-httpx.org/) which may be limited from the HTTP Client perspective but it may be possible to add rate limiting at a Session level.