Liquid VS Haml

Liquid is a template language created by shopify. In my use case I use it for generate html that is almost similar looking but differs in data. So when iterating over my HTML, I need to preview the changes I made combined with my data.

Inside the blog directory, create an index.liquid file. This will be our blog’s homepage. Eleventy provides a number of options when selecting a template engine. For this project, we’ll use Liquid.

Templating engine: SSGs rely on templating engines to define the structure of web pages. These engines enable developers to create reusable templates and incorporate dynamic content. Popular templating engines include Liquid, Handlebars, Mustache, EJS, ERB, HAML, and Slim.

Assuming I understand the ask, I think my approach would be to have a trigger fire when a ticket's custom field is set to "add user to the application." That trigger would notify a webhook. That webhook would be set to the Organization API endpoint with a payload that uses liquid markup to add 1 to the existing Organization's value.

For example, their theme templates use Liquid, which is a html templating system for Ruby. Activemerchant also was released by Shopify, and it provides a interface to major payment providers like PayPal.

In the meantime, Liquid v4.0.4 has been released, and allows building a Jekyll site with the latest Ruby.

Liquid docs - https://shopify.github.io/liquid/

Then, let’s create the simplest template for our static Eleventy page. We’ll write it using Liquid, but since it’s so simple, it won’t take advantage of any useful templating tags for now. Let’s call it index.liquid:

Previously I have used Jekyll for blogging and it has served me well for simple blogs and static websites. Jekyll is a static site generator that relies on Markdown, Liquid, HTML, and CSS. Which means no JavaScript -- a Jamstack without the J. With GitHub Pages you can even host Jekyll sites directly from your repository.2

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.