ppx_deriving VS dream-html

> You gave a beautiful answer about programming language

You do the same thing as in Rust, Scala or Haskell and derive the printer [1]. Then at the callsite, if you know the type then you do `T.show` to print it or `T.eq`. If you don't know the type, then you pass it in at the top level as a module and then do `T.show` or `T.eq`.

> Or to convert one type into another type?

If you want to convert a type, then you have a type that you want to convert from such as foo and bar, then you do `Foo.to_bar value`.

We can keep going, but you can get the point.

You _can't_ judge a language by doing what you want to do with one language in another. If I judge Rust by writing recursive data structures and complaining about performance and verbosity that's not particularly fair correct? I can't say that Dart is terrible for desktop because I can't use chrome developer tools on its canvas output and ignore it's hot-reloading server. I can't say Common Lisp code is unreadable because I don't have type annotations and ignore the REPL for introspection.

[1] https://github.com/ocaml-ppx/ppx_deriving

Ocaml has the amazing ppx_deriving which can be used for serialization / deserialization in various formats.

I wrote a CLI tool and I'd like to produce statically linked binaries of my tool. However, I cannot do this because I'm using the ppx_deriving deriving preprocessor, and I cannot produce a statically linked executable while using this package.

Not great, not terrible; the language supports annotations which mean nothing to the compiler but which pre-processors can take advantage of, and there is a framework called ppx which you can use to write your own preprocessor. There exist many pre-processors to do things like add inline tests, generate getter/setter/pretty-printing functions, and so on. Here is an example:

https://github.com/ocaml-ppx/ppx_deriving

is from https://github.com/ocaml-ppx/ppx_deriving

Have you tried to derive a print function using https://github.com/ocaml-ppx/ppx_deriving

However, there is a ppx (a pre-processor) which can do the job : ppx_deriving. You just have to anotate your type in oder to get the compare function automatically generated :

There is some truth to this. Imho the next level of htmx is unlocked when you componentize everything like a React app...but with nested routes corresponding to nested components like a Remix app...and using an HTML generation DSL embedded directly in your language, so HTML becomes a first-class citizen of your language's constructs, rather than a templated afterthought. I have a demo of this: https://github.com/yawaramin/dream-html/tree/todoapp/app

Nowadays I highly recommend HTML embedding libraries directly in the programming language. E.g. ScalaTags https://com-lihaoyi.github.io/scalatags/ or (my own) https://github.com/yawaramin/dream-html

Yes, you give up the ability of designers and frontend-only people to easily work with the HTML templates. But in exchange you get quite a lot.

I found your article very informative and it matches up quite a bit with my own thinking about HTML generation. In fact it looks like we independently arrived at pretty much the same conclusions. A lot of the issues you raise are the impetus behind the way I designed my HTML-generation DSL: https://github.com/yawaramin/dream-html

I am developing an HTML generation library on top of Dream, to have great support in the language including htmx support: https://yawaramin.github.io/dream-html/dream-html/Dream_html/index.html

Look at this code which prints out an HTML tag: https://github.com/yawaramin/dream-html/blob/main/lib/dream_...

Initially you might think generating HTML tags from data structures in code should be a simple matter. But there are complexities--some tags are defined as having no child tags, others do. Some tags are purely character data (unstructured text), not structured data. Some are just comments. We need a way to compose multiple tags together into a single 'virtual' tag for flexible HTML generation. All these conditions can be pretty hard to keep track of--unless your compiler does exhaustiveness checking. Then the compiler will tell you if you missed any cases.

In the example above I didn't make any manual effort to cover all the cases, I simple listed out the cases I wanted to handle in order. The compiler made sure that I didn't miss any.