opinion time
Pug is the only good way of writing HTML known to humanity.
Raw HTML is tedious and its only advantage is the ability <b>to insert tags in the middle</b>, which turns out to be a minor usecase.
Most HTML templating engines use HTML syntax, which is not better than HTML. Hyperscript-type things are idiotic.
This frustrates me because there's so little Pug support out there.
What do you folks do?
@matejcik I don't care much for writing raw HTML, but I've been doing it for so long that I can do it long enough to put together some Jinja templates.
The problem with Pug is that it depends on the whole Node.js ecosystem -- and I don't get paid enough to deal with that shit. :)
@starbreaker very true!
There's also pypugjs, but last time I tried it it was rather buggy. And it doesn't integrate well - it's a converter, not a renderer.
Hence my sadness.
@matejcik I don't worry that much about it, TBH. My design sensibility for personal websites is close to that of http://bettermotherfuckingwebsite.com, so when making templates I just hold my nose and use an editor with decent completion.
@starbreaker for things like that I use Markdown, which is also better than HTML.
But when trying to do apps... HTML is horribly unsuitable for apps. And framework developers don't seem to care. How.
@matejcik I'm currently using Pelican to build the next version of my website. It's Python-based and uses HTML and Jinja2 for templates, but it generates the content from my choice of Markdown or reStructuredText. Once I get the templates the way I want them, I don't have to fuck around with HTML.
As for apps: I use whatever I'm getting paid to use. I don't get paid enough to give a shit. If some dumb fuck wants classic ASP and VBscript and is willing to pay for it, I'll put up with it.
@matejcik I drink. Frequently to excess.