Hi Rodrigo, I agree that it mostly syntactic sugar, but a lot of people are going towards that. I personally think it increases readability, which is something I always try to improve, but as you've said it is a personal opinion.
The reason I raised this question is two sided, firstly just to understand if this had been discussed and what came out of that discussion, secondly to see how the community feels about this. Because even though it is about personal developer taste, if enough developer like it, then it becomes the community's taste and we should try to adapt to that. Not saying this will be the case, but it is at least a possibility I'm willing to entertain. Best, Luís Zamith On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas <[email protected] > wrote: > Hi Luís, personally I don't think HAML or Slim add much when compared to > ERB as Sass (in special) and CoffeeScript add to CSS and JS respectively. > > SASS enable developers to add variables to CSS while still being > compatible with plain CSS so it's like a no-brainer as a good default in my > opinion. > > CoffeeScript is a mix of new interesting features, less boilerplate and > personal taste. Some don't like it and won't use it, but I personally > prefer CoffeeScript over JavaScript. But you can't deny CoffeeScript allows > you to develop JavaScript classes more easily/ellegantly at least. > > For HAML or SLIM, it doesn't provide any actual new feature over HTML/ERB. > It will only provide sugar allowing developers to write HTML with less code > but in the end it boils down to personal developer's taste. I don't have > any strong opinion with regards to HAML or Slim, but differently from the > JavaScript case I don't feel the pain of writing HTML. My code editor (Vim > with plugins) already allows me to write HTML as quickly as writing Slim > templates with a few keybindings and I don't have any problems reading HTML > code. On the other side I don't think I would have any trouble > reading/writing Slim/HAML code either. It's simply a matter that I don't > see any significant advantages of Slim/HAML over HTML/ERB... > > Best, > Rodrigo. > > > On 08-07-2014 08:11, Luis Ferreira wrote: > > Hi, > > I'm not sure if this has ever been discussed, but I couldn't find it in > the issues, so I'll assume it hasn't. > > Over time HAML and Slim have been more and more used as html preprocessors > instead of ERB. As we moved CSS and JS preprocessor to more elegant, > indentation based ones, such as Sass and CoffeeScript, I wonder if it would > not be a good move to do that for the HTML preprocessor as well. > > There is much to gain: > > - Cleaner syntax > - Less code and boilerplate > - HTML minification by default (in the case of slim) > > As to what we might loose is speed, which in the case of slim is not that > much when compared to ERB. > > Maybe I'm missing some huge reason why this change has not happened yet, > but either way I believe it is worth discussing. > > -- > Best, > Luís Ferreira > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- Cumprimentos, Luís Ferreira -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
