Enlive is abstractement conceive : if you put a remote on client you could cache it...
To do that with the same abstract language , you have the awesome enfocus [0] lib with a sample app here [1], and for those clojururians interested in MVC [2] Any way, there will be some *remote *to get that functionality on Enlive, it would be great ! [0] https://github.com/ckirkendall/enfocus [1] todomvc.herokuapp.com [2] http://github.com/phperret/peer-one/ Le vendredi 10 août 2012 12:21:00 UTC+2, john a écrit : > > Hello, > I am just trying to understand the best practices in "ClojureScript One". > > One thing that strikes me is that most html gets put (with the help of > macros using enlive) in the actual cljs page. > > As someone who hasn't done web-applications for years I myself would have > created as much dynamic html content > as possible on the server. But yet "ClojureScript One" seems to prefer to > have all html in maps and render it on the client? > > I also looked at Chris Granger's "crate" library and it seems to also > follow this principle. > > Since I consider Chris Granger and Brento Ashworth to be web experts I > would just like to know the disadvantages of having > most html rendered on the server? > > Many Greetings > John > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
