Haml VS PaperTrail

First of all, I like Slim. I like the beauty and cleanness of Slim templates, to me they are way more readable than regular ERB templates and I think they fit in the ruby/Rails ecosystem very well. Slim is a close cousin to Haml, without the ugly percent characters, haha. I've used Slim exclusively in my projects since about 2016.

> I can't say what problem it is supposed to solve

"Haml accelerates and simplifies template creation" https://haml.info/

If you'd rather write raw HTML, keeping track of closing tags etc, then don't use HAML. No need to bash it because you personally feel it is ugly or unnecessary. FWIW I personally feel the exact opposite.

Personally, I'd recommend Maud if you don't need something with runtime reloading. Not only is it much faster, it implements a template language that is effectively the Rust-syntax equivalent to Slim or Haml using a procedural macro, so you get compile-time verification that your HTML output is well-formed.

Does this support HAML-style syntax? We're 100% HAML-only for templating, whether normal Rails views or ViewComponent... https://github.com/haml/haml https://haml.info/ so going back to writing HTML or ERB feels like a huge downgrade.

For templating, Maud is fast, gives compile-time well-formedness guarantees, and outputs minified HTML by default as a side-effect of it being based on Rust macros. (It's of a similar design philosophy to Slim and Haml)

You don’t even need closing tags. Both Haml and Jade do away with closing tags altogether.

That looks awfully like HAML.

Your HBML is similar to HAML - is it time for HCML? https://haml.info/

it's an HTML preprocessor called HAML

Views are written in haml. If you work on erb there are converters like haml-to-erb. I am working on RubyMine, Apple-Notebook, production Server is Debian (for node-setup) and yarn. I tried to write less text and rather link to the sources.

if the source (web) application makes their own audit tables. ex: our ruby on rails application uses the paper-trail gem

Start with https://github.com/paper-trail-gem/paper_trail

We use paper_trail for this

I think you could use that in conjunction with the paper_trail gem, as /u/GreenCalligrapher571 mentioned, which is also a good suggestion. As an additional note, when changing records in production while using the paper_trail gem, I suggest wrapping your database-mutating statements executed in the rails console within a whodunnit block, so PaperTrail.request(whodunnit: 'Dorian Marié') { widget.update name: 'Wibble' } or something rather than just widget.update name: 'Wibble'. Or, if you have some sort of issue-tracking / ticketing system, you could set the whodunnit value to the ticket number or whatever, and then anyone who wants to know why the records are in the state they're in can consult that ticket, which hopefully has additional relevant context.

For a while we did this using the paper-trail gem. This was a very simple way to add a few lines of code to keep track of all of the changes made to an ActiveRecord model. But it came with one drawback. Every change to the data had to be done through ActiveRecord. There are often times when this makes an app vulnerable to a race condition. I’ll use a contrived example so as not to share any real code from our client’s app.

In most designs, this would probably not be possible unless a table tracking extension is being used in an ORM. Even with change tracking enabled through extensions like paper trail or Django simple history, it can be tricky to restore deleted entities. Object tracking would need to have been enabled before it is needed to ensure the data is still around to be restored.

Maybe you are looking for the papertrail gem? https://github.com/paper-trail-gem/paper_trail