Do all the things like ++ or -- rants, post your own rants, comment on others' rants and build your customized dev avatarSign Up
From the creators of devRant, Pipeless lets you power real-time personalized recommendations and activity feeds using a simple APILearn More
theuser528335dThe real question is, does HTML need an alternative/preprocessor? I vote a def no.
Well, technically it's just a preprocessor, like a templating engine, right? Browsers only read HTML anyways.
Voxera884835dIts not an alternative.
Its a markup language that is converted into html using ruby just like hundreds other markup languages.
Personally I do not consider it easier to read. If I wanted easier to read markdown is better as its even more dimple syntax.
The closest “alternative” is pure xml + xslt.
The reason is that both are sent to the browser as plain text and uses the built in support of the browser to convert into html right in the browser.
And while the xslt can be very complex, once you have it designed the xml can be very simple and easy to read with context oriented elements.
bagfox69835dThe only reason I don’t use HTML is when I make a pen, then, it’s easier to write haml.
Def wouldn’t change HTML for anything.
Kimmax1185335dI use haml for bootstrap
Is much nicer to read when it comes to 73363949302727 nested divs IMHO
jiraTicket93535dHaml just compiles to HTML.
Like how Sass/Less/Stylus compiles to CSS
Typescript/Elm/CoffeScript/ClojureScript compiles to JS.
Weon27334dstaticmatic got me into haml. those were the days