3 ms·
I wanted this so badly as a Rails dev checking out Rust a few years ago (and still kind of do). At the time, i convinced myself that if I was going to move to a
by amichal 8y ago
I wanted this so badly as a Rails dev checking out Rust a few years ago (and still kind of do). At the time, i convinced myself that if I was going to move to a type-safe compiled language i should see if compiled type-safe templates could work for me. I made a note of https://maud.lambda.xyz/ https://maud.lambda.xyz/ at the time which notice is still going and has a lot of a clean syntax of haml with some of the more rust-y compile time and type-safety aspects.
- h1d 8y agoKind of off topic but why do you consider Haml better than Slim?
- jetti 8y agoOne thing to note, Haml-rs is going to be different than maud in the sense that, at least currently, there is no support for any sort of variables or expressions. You cannot use Rust (or Ruby) in this Haml-rs templates and expect them to render correctly. It is something that I'm looking into and trying to think of the best way to handle it. Do I cripple variables and get rid of expressions? Do I allow Rust to be used instead of Ruby in the template? It is something I need to think about before working on.