this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2023
12 points (100.0% liked)

Programming

13368 readers
2 users here now

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.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] brie@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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.

[โ€“] Paradox@lemdro.id 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 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