LAlaurentlb·Dec 9, 2024
Yes, you can try these bindings:
- https://github.com/caketop/python-starlark-go
- https://github.com/inducer/starlark-pyo3
(I haven't tried them myself)
In Starlark Programming Languageinducer
starlark-pyo3
Rust2023–2024
inducer / starlark-pyo3
starlark-pyo3
A Python wrapper for starlark-rust
2Distinct people
3Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
47GitHub stars
What to know before exploring
What it is
A Python wrapper for starlark-rust
GitHub
Where it is used
No documented product use has been verified yet.
What people are saying
No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.
No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.
Also in these discussions
- caketop/python-starlark-go · linked in 3 of the same discussions
Mentioned in the same Hacker News threads. That is not proof they are substitutes.
This week on Hacker News
Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 3:56:07 PM UTC.
No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.
Mentions over time
HN mentions by month3 dated mentions
Observed mentions: 2023-09-28 11:13:15 UTC to 2024-12-09 23:39:00 UTC.
Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.
View mention counts and date ranges
| Period | Start (UTC) | End (exclusive, UTC) | Mentions | Submissions | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 2023 | 2023-09-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2023-10-01 00:00:00 UTC | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Oct 2023 | 2023-10-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2023-11-01 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Nov 2023 | 2023-11-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2023-12-01 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Dec 2023 | 2023-12-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jan 2024 | 2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2024-02-01 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Feb 2024 | 2024-02-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2024-03-01 00:00:00 UTC | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Mar 2024 | 2024-03-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2024-04-01 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Apr 2024 | 2024-04-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2024-05-01 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| May 2024 | 2024-05-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2024-06-01 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jun 2024 | 2024-06-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2024-07-01 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jul 2024 | 2024-07-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2024-08-01 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Aug 2024 | 2024-08-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2024-09-01 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2024 | 2024-09-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2024-10-01 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Oct 2024 | 2024-10-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2024-11-01 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Nov 2024 | 2024-11-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2024-12-01 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Dec 2024 | 2024-12-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 1 | 0 | 1 |
What Hacker News says
3 sourcesPeople interested in configuring Python software in Python
should look into Starlark.
There are Python bindings for two versions of Starlark:
Go (https://github.com/caketop/python-starlark-go)
and Rust (https://github.com/inducer/starlark-pyo3).
I used python-starlark-go for a time
in a project that ran on x86-64 Linux
and had no problems with it.
(I stopped because my project's configuration turned out simpler than expected,
so I switched to TOML.)
Worth noting that it is specifically CPython that has been called impossible to sandbox.
(2014 discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8280053.)
It may be possible to sandbox PyPy.
PyPy has a sandboxing feature its website calls a "working prototype"
(https://www.pypy.org/features.html#sandboxing).
If someone invested in it—potentially a huge effort—it could plausibly become good enou
Read the rest
gh for configuration.
But, IMO, Starlark is a better choice here
because it was designed for isolation from the start.
If you wanted to invest in Python-as-config-for-Python,
a good use of your time might be improving Starlark for Python.
I think Jinja-in-YAML is very much an antipattern. It seems to come from not designing for enough programmability from the start (and then from people copying successful projects that took that route?).
The page mentions some alternatives like Dhall and Jsonnet. Two more to consider:
1. Write a configuration library for a real programming language. Have this library generate a JSON configuration file that is treated purely as an inspectable artifact, not something to edit by hand. The user will have their configuration as tooling-enabled code checked into version control (hopefully). That it will be harder to make an emergency fix directly on the server has its downsides and upsides.
(What was the first prominent piece of software to implement this idea? I kind of got it by osmosis.)
2. Starlark. It is a non-Turing-complete language deriv
Read the rest
ed from Python that was originally developed for the Bazel build system. It has several implementations (I am not sure how deeply compatible they are) and now Python bindings (https://github.com/caketop/python-starlark-go for starlark-go, https://github.com/inducer/starlark-pyo3 for starlark-rust).