typer VS pydantic

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?

utype is a concise alternative of pydantic with simplified parameters and usages, supporting both sync/async functions and generators parsing, and capable of using native logic operators to define logical types like AND/OR/NOT, also provides custom type parsing by register mechanism that supports libraries like pydantic, attrs and dataclasses

I like some of the changes from v1 to v2. But then you have something like this [0] removed from the library without proper documentation or replacement, resulting in ugly workarounds in the link that wont' work properly.

[0]: https://github.com/pydantic/pydantic/discussions/6337

The easiest implementation I found was to use a PyDantic class for my target schema — and use that as a parameter for the method call to “ChatCompletion.create()”. Here’s a fragment of the GinAI Python classes used.

Also, FastStream uses Pydantic to parse input JSON-encoded data into Python objects, making it easy to work with structured data in your applications, so you can serialize your input messages just using type annotations.

Pydantic Validation: Leverage Pydantic's validation capabilities to serialize and validate incoming messages

Not sure if it is exactly related, but there is an open issue on Github for that exact message.

Well the performance increase is so huge because pydantic1 is really really slow. And for using rust, I'd have expected more tbh…

I've been benchmarking pydantic v2 against typedload (which I write) and despite the rust, it still manages to be slower than pure python in some benchmarks.

The ones on the website are still about comparing to v1 because v2 was not out yet at the time of the last release.

pydantic's author will refuse to benchmark any library that is faster (https://github.com/pydantic/pydantic/pull/3264 https://github.com/pydantic/pydantic/pull/1525 https://github.com/pydantic/pydantic/pull/1810) and keep boasting about amazing performances.

On pypy, v2 beta was really really really slow.