×
The Ruby and Rails community linklog
Made a library? Written a blog post? Found a useful tutorial? Share it with the Ruby community here or just enjoy what everyone else has found!
Made a library? Written a blog post? Found a useful tutorial? Share it with the Ruby community here or just enjoy what everyone else has found!
Comments
Just what we don’t need! What is the advantage? Similar syntax to erb except you get to use Lua in your ruby application? Brother, what a waste of time! Give me haml, now that is innovation!
In response to “not_another_template_system!”:
You are missing the goal of this project. It is similar to Liquid (and I would personally still prefer Liquid). Its not meant as a programmer’s templating language, its meant to allow USERS to template the site. Want to provide custom themes for your users? You don’t want to allow them to use eRB or Haml (which has full access to Ruby also), you instead want to give them sandboxed access to some data and to make HTML.
This is the goal of Laminate, it seems.
Does Laminate offer more security over Liquid? I realize Liquid was written in Ruby, but I thought Liquid was written to provide safe user templates.
@not_another_template_system!: dude… u shud at least read b4 posting a comment like that. i’m also wondering abt its advantages over liquid… i haven’t used (or needed) neither… so…
Mitchell is correct, Laminate is for *user editable” templates, not for internal use by an application.
Laminate is likely less safe than Liquid, as it incorporates the whole Lua runtime. However, the template syntax is arguably more natural and the language more powerful than Liquid. I have some notes on Laminate vs Liquid over here.
Post a comment