-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Not an issue, just a question #1
Comments
In There would be almost no difference in the implementation:
I chose keywords over symbols because I find it more readable since If we talk about Hiccup (Clojure), you do not have to use keywords.
I hope this answer your question. |
Thanks for providing the insight, I did not expect the highliting aspect (which makes a lot of sense). Neither did I know one could use symbols in Hiccup. I have been uncommittedly fantasizing about an "any-lisp anytime" HTML generation strategy that works in elisp, Clojure, CL and Scheme. One could get immediate results within Emacs, and deploy to other lispy languages (bootstrapping and surrounding app logic would be lispy-variant-specific); at development time or runtime, server side or client side (e.g. ClojureScript). Perhaps that may someday lead to an abstraction where a view is described by its generation template, but the time&place of generation is left as an optimization which decides which bits are SSG, SSR or CSR. |
Why not use symbols instead of keywords, to reduce syntax? Hiccup and others also go with keywords. Is it performance or memory footprint?
E.g.
(jack-html `(div/id1.c1 (h1 (p ,text))))
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: