Why not use page caching if you want html? I have been using haml on
everything and the upside to using it is that the markup is so
browser friendly it normally renders faster than my overly verbose
tag soup of rhtml. My site, http://calicowebdev.com is pure haml, a
single mongrel, and no caching. This is outperforming many PHP sites
I've done.
Just my experience.
--steve
On Mar 22, 2007, at 2:42 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Ok, before I go ahead and write it. Has someone written something that
> will take haml and output an html file? I realize this kinda seems
> redundant, but on certain projects I can't use ruby (like my day job),
> but it looks much more fun that just typing html or css.
>
> On Mar 22, 3:36 am, "Nex3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Well, shucks.
>>
>> 1. We don't compile to RHTML, we compile straight to HTML. Well, not
>> straight, there are some steps in between, but those are
>> implementation details. Performance-wise, because Haml needs to think
>> about the entire document, rather than just certain sections, it is
>> slower than ERb (which is the system RHTML uses). On my computer, it
>> currently benchmarks at about 2.7 times as slow, although the test
>> pages aren't entirely equivalent (there are a lot of shortcuts taken
>> in the Haml page that simply can't be done in RHTML). We do keep an
>> eye out for performance, though, and it has been increasing pretty
>> steadily.
>>
>> 2. Yes, in fact, there is. Haml works just as well as a Ruby
>> module as
>> it does as a plugin. You can grab the gem by running "gem install
>> haml", and then use the Haml::Engine class to render stuff (or
>> Sass::Engine for Sass). Check out the rdoc,http://
>> haml.hamptoncatlin.com/docs/rdoc,
>> for a full reference, but the gist is:
>>
>> Haml::Engine.new("%h1 Scripted Haml!").render #=> <h1>Scripted
>> Haml!
>> </h1>
>>
>> Hope that was helpful :).
>>
>> - Nathan
>>
>> On Mar 22, 1:22 am, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> First off let me say Haml seems very awesome (jsut learned about it)
>>> and I think the developers are awesome too (shameless compliment).
>>> It's quite coincidental that I was just thinking about how
>>> repetitive
>>> html and css were and was about to start work on some thing when I
>>> found this. It's like they read my mind.....creepy. Anyways I had
>>> two
>>> quick questions.
>>
>>> 1. How much of a performance hit does it make having to compile to
>>> rhtml and then render?
>>> 2. Is there a way you can script it and then precompile it? i.e.
>>> write
>>> in on your machine then compile to html/rhtml/css and then upload?
>>> Cause I'd really like to use this on my non ruby based web dev
>>> stuff.
>>
>>> Thanks in advance and keep up the good work, can't wait to see
>>> what's
>>> next.
>
>
> >
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Haml" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/haml?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
