On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 4:35 AM, Иван Бишевац <[email protected]> wrote: > I use both, but prefer haml, because it's concise.
I normally give clients a decision when the project starts (or make my own based on what they express their technical skill to be at the start of a project.) In short what I tell clients is "Do you know much about HTML? Does learning something new really bug you or do you want to work with what you know?" Those two questions help me decide whether to use HAML which is concise like the above quote states or use ERB which has a far less learning curve and for technology disinclined people who know basic HTML, does not lock them out of their own views. For the performance issues, to me that matters not one bit considering I do fragment caching and I do full caching depending on the page so at that point the argument is moot, unless you are dynamically serving every one of your pages dynamically which is ignorant to do even on a small site. So in short the issues about "speed" in my eyes are immature and ignorant to modern caching techniques for dynamic sites. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" 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 https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
