[LRUG] HAML

[Tom Armitage]

On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 3:22 PM, Anthony Green <Anthony.Green at bbc.co.uk> wrote:
>> Isn't it time you all gave in and used haml?  Come on - you know it
>> makes sense....
>
> As a Semantic HTML Web Standardista I also presumed it could only lead to
> more terrible HTML code.

So was I, and am now convinced this just isn't true.

So: the main thing I noticed about HAML, to begin with, is that it was
clearly a tool written for programmers (rather than dedicated
client-side developers) to write HTML. Which, you know, sets alarm
bells ringing.

However: if you know HTML, and write good HTML, there's nothing to
stop you using HAML to write good HTML. Very good HTML, in fact. The
few decent HAML sites I've worked on are behind firewalls, I'm afraid,
otherwise I'd send you a link.

You do have to do a small amount of translation, but there are some
good trade-offs:
- HAML spits out valid (X)HTML automatically. Either it throws an
error because you've made a mistake, or it generates and closes an
element. Yes, I usually write valid code; HAML ensures I do.
- HAML spits out beautifully formatted code. This is really, really
useful; I hate debugging sites based on a "view source" view that's a
mess, caused by partials and ERB templates with their own indentations
all playing havoc with one another. This is avoidable, but HAML
doesn't require you to take great lengths; it spits out nicely
formatted code, which makes debugging fine.

Honestly, as a decent client-side dev, I've been able to implement
complex, fiddly designs in HAML with no trouble; I've been able to
write decent, semantic haml and avoid divitis with no problem; I've
managed to majorly cut down repetition and lines-of-code written, and
yet the templates are clear, understandable, and well-maintained.

I am always wary of abstractions, and as with all abstractions, the
main point is: make sure you understand the thing being abstracted
first. If you don't write decent HTML, HAML won't help. If you do, it
will. This is the main problem it has (and, that because it's all a
bit strange, it's favoured by back-end devs, rather than client-side
bods). But I'm a total convert, if only for my wrists' sake.

(Still not convinced on SASS yet, in part because it's *too* similar
to CSS. That's my inner csd coming out).