[idf00]

> Once you grow beyond the "website" with simple interaction your front end becomes it's own universe

I think this has been a major failing/pain point of web-dev that this MUST be the case. However, I think fastHTML for me is going to fix that. Naturally there is no approach that is ideal in every case, but for a ton of them fastHTML I think works. I've built several things with fastHTML and am very optimistic.

As far as the visual identification, I think python is just as clear to see visual blocks as HTML, but comes with many additional refactoring options (that you can choose when it makes sense to use for your use-case).

Try playing with https://h2x.answer.ai/ and putting in some HTML code and see how it looks in python. Maybe you'll disagree, but I find it quite refreshing.

[harel]

I guess it's a personal preference. I tried it, and it looked a mess in my eyes.

Take a strong tag:

    Div(
        "If you click '",
        Strong('Accept all'),
        "', we and",
        A('our partners', href='/v2/partners', target='_blank'),
        ... 

It just verbose, very Java like, and feels like a step back in a commercial setting. It's absolutely fine if you're a single developer, HTML disgusts you, and Javascript is an abomination. I know people who think that way and I know they would love it. But I'm as comfortable with JS and I am with Python (after over 25 years using both). Someone likened JSX to it - but it's not even close - JSX brings the tag structure INTO JavaScript, not takes it away, to achieve the exact opposite result of fastHTML.

[mixmastamyk]

This is html building not js. It’s not any more verbose, in fact slightly less because no need for closing tags. Main difference is parens instead of angle brackets. Now you can use tools.

I do prefer lower case callables but that’s a minor nitpick, and “htpy” and other libs can do that.