Pros of Skulpt

• Skulpt is a full-featured Python interpreter that runs entirely in the browser, allowing for client-side execution of Python code.
• Skulpt has a large and active community, with regular updates and improvements.
• Skulpt provides a comprehensive set of Python standard library modules, making it a viable option for a wide range of use cases.

Cons of Skulpt

• Skulpt has a larger codebase and footprint compared to Brython, which may impact performance and load times in some scenarios.
• Skulpt's focus on full-featured Python support may make it more complex to set up and configure for simpler use cases.
• Skulpt's development is primarily driven by a single organization, which could potentially limit the diversity of contributions and features.

Code Comparison

Brython:

from browser import document, alert

def say_hello(event):
    alert("Hello, world!")

document["mybutton"].bind("click", say_hello)

Skulpt:

import sys
from io import StringIO

def hello():
    print("Hello, world!")

old_stdout = sys.stdout
sys.stdout = buffer = StringIO()
hello()
sys.stdout = old_stdout
print(buffer.getvalue())

Pros of Pyodide

• Pyodide is a full-featured Python environment that can run in the browser, allowing for client-side Python execution.
• Pyodide provides a comprehensive set of scientific and data analysis libraries, making it well-suited for data-driven web applications.
• Pyodide's integration with WebAssembly enables efficient and fast execution of Python code in the browser.

Cons of Pyodide

• Pyodide has a larger initial download size compared to Brython, which can impact page load times.
• Pyodide's dependency on WebAssembly may limit its compatibility with older browsers.
• Pyodide's focus on scientific and data-related libraries may make it less suitable for general-purpose web development tasks.

Code Comparison

Brython:

from browser import document, alert

def say_hello(event):
    alert("Hello, world!")

document <= "<button>Click me</button>"
document["button"].bind("click", say_hello)

Pyodide:

import js
from pyodide import create_proxy

def say_hello(event):
    js.alert("Hello, world!")

button = js.document.createElement("button")
button.textContent = "Click me"
button.addEventListener("click", create_proxy(say_hello))
js.document.body.appendChild(button)

Both examples create a simple button that displays an alert when clicked, but the Pyodide version requires more boilerplate code to interact with the JavaScript DOM.

Pros of pyscript

• pyscript is a more recent project, with active development and a growing community.
• pyscript provides a more streamlined and user-friendly experience for running Python in the browser, with a focus on simplicity and ease of use.
• pyscript has better integration with modern web frameworks and tools, such as Jupyter Notebook and Streamlit.

Cons of pyscript

• pyscript has a smaller ecosystem and fewer resources available compared to Brython.
• pyscript may have fewer features and customization options than Brython, which has been around for longer.
• pyscript's performance and compatibility with older browsers may not be as robust as Brython's.

Code Comparison

Brython:

from browser import document, alert

def say_hello(event):
    alert("Hello, world!")

document["mybutton"].bind("click", say_hello)

pyscript:

import js

def say_hello(event):
    js.alert("Hello, world!")

pyscript.write_to_element("mybutton", "click", say_hello)

Both examples demonstrate how to create a simple button that displays an alert when clicked, but the syntax and approach differ between the two libraries.

Pros of RustPython

• Performance: RustPython is written in Rust, a systems programming language known for its performance and safety. This can result in faster execution times compared to Brython, which is written in JavaScript.
• Concurrency: Rust's built-in support for concurrency and parallelism can potentially enable RustPython to better leverage modern hardware and improve overall performance.
• Portability: Rust's cross-compilation capabilities can make RustPython more portable across different platforms and architectures.

Cons of RustPython

• Ecosystem: Brython has a larger and more established ecosystem, with more third-party libraries and tools available for Python developers.
• Learning Curve: Developers familiar with Python may need to invest more time in learning Rust, which has a different syntax and programming paradigm compared to Python.
• Maturity: Brython has been around for longer and may have a more stable and feature-complete implementation of the Python language.

Code Comparison

Brython (Python):

def hello(name):
    print(f"Hello, {name}!")

hello("World")

RustPython (Rust):

fn hello(name: &str) {
    println!("Hello, {}!", name);
}

fn main() {
    hello("World");
}

The code snippets above demonstrate a simple "Hello, World!" program in both Brython (Python) and RustPython (Rust). The overall structure and functionality are similar, but the syntax and language-specific features differ.