1. Is there something that I am doing wrong or could do better? It definitely took me a lot longer than 20 minutes (more like hours). I am not that good with HTML to begin with. Is that a factor?
ME: doing the rewriting bit by bit may help ... write small fragments before u proceed further, so that u can discover mistakes early ... less headache. 2. I counted the number of non-white lines in both ERB (45) and Haml (30) implementations. Haml code is approx. two-third of the ERB code. May be this adds up over the long haul? ME: no comments, i find haml syntax more concise and requires less typing, and these are factors that i'm hooked to haml (after only 2 weeks of usage) 3. I can definitely see that the code is better to look at since it is indented so nicely and there is "less" noise compared to XHTML verbocity. Is that what you all like over a period of time? ME: I like the well structured generated HTML. even though i can use firebug to inspect the html source, occasionally i still prefer a quick ctrl-U in firefox. 4. The error messages will take time getting used to. ME: same here. Also, haml forces me to write cleaner template in the sense that since multiline fragment like the following is invalid: - select :role, :label => label, :collection => @collection, - :name => "groups[role]", :prompt => 'none', - :selected => selected? and i like to keep me code within a certain page width, i'm forced to write helpers and use them like: - select_group_role( ... ) Cheers !! == On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 11:58 AM, Bharat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Will do from now onwards. By the way, I managed to debug the haml > script and it is working fine now. I will not bother to post it > unless someone wants to see it. Thanks everyone for the > encouragement. My short intro to haml has actually prompted more > questions: > > 1. Is there something that I am doing wrong or could do better? It > definitely took me a lot longer than 20 minutes (more like hours). I > am not that good with HTML to begin with. Is that a factor? > > 2. I counted the number of non-white lines in both ERB (45) and Haml > (30) implementations. Haml code is approx. two-third of the ERB > code. May be this adds up over the long haul? > > 3. I can definitely see that the code is better to look at since it > is indented so nicely and there is "less" noise compared to XHTML > verbocity. Is that what you all like over a period of time? > > 4. The error messages will take time getting used to. > > Please comment on my observations. > > Regards, > > Bharat > > > > -- http://ngty77.blogspot.com --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Haml" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/haml?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
