If either of you have suggestions for how to make the error messages better, I'm all ears. I've tried to make them as new-user-friendly as possible, but since I'm so familiar with Haml I fear I don't always succeed.
Tze Yang Ng wrote: > 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 >> >> > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
