My belated 2c (sorry, work has been keeping me away from things Yesod and Haskell):<div><br></div><div>1. The key reason I switched to Yesod was Hamlet. I'm very new to Haskell, and I wanted to try developing a webapp in it; when I looked at the various frameworks, my main question was "What will require me to learn the least new stuff, while still giving me a full Haskell-based development experience?" Yesod was the answer, because I was already familiar with Haml. So, it is one less thing a large swath of people need to learn when they decide to give Yesod a try. And at least in my case, it was a deciding factor.</div>
<div><br></div><div>2. I'm not convinced closeness to HTML is a design goal. My experience is again limited, but I wouldn't expect many people to switch existing projects to Yesod (or really, from any framework to any other); therefore, the idea that someone will have a bunch of HTML to be converted as simply as possible to whatever templating language we use seems remote. </div>
<div><br></div><div>3. Along the same lines, the reason for the existence of templating frameworks like Haml and Hamlet is precisely that people don't enjoy writing HTML: why would we constrain ourselves by similarity to something people have put large (and creative) amounts of effort into avoiding? I think it is unduly limiting.</div>
<div><br></div><div>4. I do believe there are some issues with Hamlet; in fact, the issues raised by Greg are exactly the issues I have. I don't see having a Yesod-specific templating language as the solution, unless this new syntax gives Yesod such a big productivity boost compared to using Hamlet that it's worth putting in the effort.</div>
<div><br></div><div>In brief, I think Hamlet is 95% of the way there, and that Michael has done a great job with it. It seems easier to take it another 4% and get it to 99% than it would be to rewrite the syntax from scratch. I don't view HTML similarity as a bonus (or a malus, either way). Maintaining (and furthering) similarity with Haml seems worthier goal, given how many people use it, are familiar with it, and love it; it will ease adoption.</div>
<div><br></div><div>I hope this all made sense, and that I didn't start an argument about bike shed colors... ;-)</div><div><br></div><div>Alexandros</div><div><br></div><div><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 10:48 AM, Michael Snoyman <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:michael@snoyman.com">michael@snoyman.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">Alright, at this point I've only heard positive things about this<br>
syntax change. Does anyone want to volunteer to try and tackle this,<br>
or will this need to wait till I can get around to it? Fair warning:<br>
I'm likely to try to deal with the WAI + enumerator and xml-enumerator<br>
tasks first. If someone wants to take a crack at the Hamlet changes,<br>
I'll be happy to review things.<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
Michael<br>
</font><div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 2:38 AM, Simon Michael <<a href="mailto:simon@joyful.com">simon@joyful.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> I support this proposal's goal, and would be fine with rewriting my<br>
> templates.<br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> web-devel mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:web-devel@haskell.org">web-devel@haskell.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/web-devel" target="_blank">http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/web-devel</a><br>
><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
web-devel mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:web-devel@haskell.org">web-devel@haskell.org</a><br>
<a href="http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/web-devel" target="_blank">http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/web-devel</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>