typer VS rich

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?

There is an open issue [1] on GitHub to make it more modular and get rid of markdown and syntax highlighting but I have no hope for rich to get more minimal.

[1]: https://github.com/Textualize/rich/issues/2277

I hope he doesn't mind, but the creator of Rich and Textualize is a good guy, and Scottish: https://www.willmcgugan.com/about/

https://www.textualize.io/

https://github.com/Textualize/rich

They keep getting improved error messaging and this is one of my favorite features. But I'd love if we could get some real rich text. Idk if anyone else uses rich, but it has infected all my programs now. Not just to print with colors, but because it makes debugging so much easier. Not just print(f"{var=}") but the handler[0,1]. Color is so important to these types of things and so is formatting. Plus, the progress bars are nice and have almost completely replaced tqdm for me[2]. They're just easier and prettier.

[0] https://rich.readthedocs.io/en/stable/logging.html

[1] Try this example: https://github.com/Textualize/rich/blob/master/examples/exce...

[2] Side note: does anyone know how to get these properly working when using DDP with pytorch? I get flickering when using this and I think it is actually down to a pytorch issue and how they're handling their loggers and flushing the screen. I know pytorch doesn't want to depend on rich, but hey, pip uses rich so why shouldn't everyone?

colors.crumb extends Crumb with basic terminal styling functions and RGB, HEX, ANSI conversion functions. It is in the realm of JavaScript's chalk and Python's rich but slightly more functional 😉.

I am working on a new python project and one of the first things I added was https://github.com/Textualize/rich because of how easy it is to make things look good in the terminal.

I am not rewriting anything but I'd love to have a library like `rich` in Rust: https://github.com/textualize/rich

Add some cool-looking stuff to your output with rich.

You might consider taking inspiration from the rich module. In particular, I like how rich supports inline color theming which seems much more cumbersome in your framework, requiring the use of context managers as well as familiarity with how your framework structures color objects. Other than that though, I'm impressed!

Today I released coBib 4.0, my console bibliography manager written in Python, which now uses rich and textual to provide a cohesive and modern user experience in both its CLI and TUI.