markup.rs VS Haml

(Sailfish is fastest, but it's syntax is of the more traditional <%= msg %> flavour and Markup.rs is second-fastest with a Maud-like syntax but the author apparently doesn't have time to rewrite the syntax reference, so you have to follow a link from the open issue to an old version of the README.)

Maud or markup.rs for templating (I use the latter, and it is faster, but they're both fast and markup.rs is currently missing its full syntax documentation unless you dig through the revision history for the stale version. I'd recommend the former for you.)

For the sake of thoroughness, I should point out that Haml-like templating engines like Maud and markup.rs are even more concise.

https://maud.lambda.xyz/ or https://github.com/utkarshkukreti/markup.rs for server-side HTML templates that compile to Rust code

(eg. In Python, Genshi templates are too slow for me to feel comfortable using them, but they were the main way to get robust correctness checks for templates last time I evaluated my options. In Rust, Markup.rs or Maud are the second and third fastest templating solutions, as I remember, and they give even more well-formedness guarantees for HTML than Genshi.)

There are various templating solutions that use syntax derived from the host language, like Maud or markup.rs for Rust, the E factory API for lxml for Python, etc.

You can have similar features to Phoenix Live View by using Turbo from Hotwire with your favorite template engine in Rust. Contrary to what the video presentation on the Hotwire main page leaves you to believe, Hotwire works with any template engine from any language, not just Rails. Markup.rs and Turbo from Hotwire should compose quite nicely.

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