You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
2 points

The Temple examples look very nice; the Builder ones to my eye look quite cluttered in comparison, which I’m guessing is due to differences in syntax between their respective languages.

I tink the main downside of templating in general is that it ends up making interfacing with JavaScript and plain HTML harder, compared to CustomElementRegistry based components.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

Builder is mostly targeted at building XML files, and so compared to XML its fairly terse. HTML is just a nice also-have. There are template langs in ruby that are a lot closer to the Elixir temple variant, but I can’t remember any of them off the top of my head haha.

A good template would make interfacing “easy”. JSX[1] is a very good example of how you can interface quite easily, and the templates used in Surface work really well to bridge some of the complexities of a server-rendered but client-dependent syntax.


  1. I know JSX isn’t a template language, the differences don’t matter for the purpose of this discussion ↩︎

permalink
report
parent
reply

Programming

!programming@beehaw.org

Create post

All things programming and coding related. Subcommunity of Technology.


This community’s icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

Community stats

  • 72

    Monthly active users

  • 235

    Posts

  • 1.5K

    Comments