• brie@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    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.

    • Paradox@lemdro.idOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      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 ↩︎