I agree with the other comments. Its super cool after it eventually loads.
For real world use I don't think its practical if its only goal is basic browser UX in Python versus JavaScript, but I can see amazing value in this for larger applications written in Python that need to make use of a Python GUI.
Absolutely. This shines when you actually want to display complex / animated / streaming data in larger applications; or if you want to create educative or training material on several pages (i.e apps here).
As an example, I once built an online stock/ticker app with it: smooth real-time updates in a nice plot. It would have been more complex with DOM based widgets (and probably less fun).
Is this downloading and installing Python packages into the browser via wasm?
I like the idea a little bit. Mostly because I don't like javascript. So I say keep going for it, it could fill some niches.
I'm sure you know this, but the page takes like 30s to load on mobile. It wasn't a comfortable ux. Once it did load it seemed pretty fast though so kudos. Kind of gave me macromedia flash vibes from 2002.
Thanks! I don't like javascript either, and I certainly dislike CSS :-)
Yes, the initial download of pyodide is about 5 MB. After that it is another 5MB for the bundle wheel.
But there is some hope: Based on test I just did, I see I did not setup headers so that the wheel and pyodide are cached in a browser (or in its fs): this could reduce reload times by a sizable factor.
Once loaded you can run at 60 FPS (or even 120 FPS depending on the browser's vsync).
As you can see in the playground: you can then switch from app to app instantly once pyodide is loaded and running. It almost feels like going from a page to another. You can see that when using the combobox to select example at the top right in the playground.
You still need JavaScript to instantiate WebAssembly and let it interact with the page, which is why your sibling comment admits there's still a bit of JS.
This is a genuine question, and I will be honest: I do not really dislike JS. I even worked on large typescript projects and appreciated it.
What I do not like is the strange mix of technologies you have to cope with in order to work with Python on the web: your project is often a mix of python / html / css / react / js / node.
Many very nice frameworks try to abstract this and present you only the python side; but they rely on this stack internally.
Once you want to reach complex use cases (such as a refresh at reasonable rate), you will have to "open the engine" and enter into this mix.
I agree with the other comments. Its super cool after it eventually loads.
For real world use I don't think its practical if its only goal is basic browser UX in Python versus JavaScript, but I can see amazing value in this for larger applications written in Python that need to make use of a Python GUI.
Absolutely. This shines when you actually want to display complex / animated / streaming data in larger applications; or if you want to create educative or training material on several pages (i.e apps here).
As an example, I once built an online stock/ticker app with it: smooth real-time updates in a nice plot. It would have been more complex with DOM based widgets (and probably less fun).
Is this downloading and installing Python packages into the browser via wasm?
I like the idea a little bit. Mostly because I don't like javascript. So I say keep going for it, it could fill some niches.
I'm sure you know this, but the page takes like 30s to load on mobile. It wasn't a comfortable ux. Once it did load it seemed pretty fast though so kudos. Kind of gave me macromedia flash vibes from 2002.
Thanks! I don't like javascript either, and I certainly dislike CSS :-)
Yes, the initial download of pyodide is about 5 MB. After that it is another 5MB for the bundle wheel.
But there is some hope: Based on test I just did, I see I did not setup headers so that the wheel and pyodide are cached in a browser (or in its fs): this could reduce reload times by a sizable factor.
Once loaded you can run at 60 FPS (or even 120 FPS depending on the browser's vsync).
As you can see in the playground: you can then switch from app to app instantly once pyodide is loaded and running. It almost feels like going from a page to another. You can see that when using the combobox to select example at the top right in the playground.
If no JavaScript then what enables interactivity?
Thanks for the question! I should have said almost no JavaScript:
There is a minimal amount of JavaScript just to download and run pyodide and then it is only Python: see example at
https://imgui-bundle.pages.dev/playground/?demo=p_35_minimal...
Very very impressive! So many use cases for this. Thanks again
Web assembly? This started out as a bowdlerised form of JavaScript (asm.js) but evolved to become is own thing.
You still need JavaScript to instantiate WebAssembly and let it interact with the page, which is why your sibling comment admits there's still a bit of JS.
just curious -- do yall dislike JS as developers, or as users? i agree this is really cool though
This is a genuine question, and I will be honest: I do not really dislike JS. I even worked on large typescript projects and appreciated it.
What I do not like is the strange mix of technologies you have to cope with in order to work with Python on the web: your project is often a mix of python / html / css / react / js / node.
Many very nice frameworks try to abstract this and present you only the python side; but they rely on this stack internally. Once you want to reach complex use cases (such as a refresh at reasonable rate), you will have to "open the engine" and enter into this mix.