On 6 August 2010 09:19, Michael Snoyman wrote:

After looking into sass a little bit, I've decided I like it ;). I see the following benefits of implementing something sass-like in Haskell via quasi-quotation:

* Compile-time guarantee of well-formedness. * The speed benefits of blaze-builder. Of course, this will still be slower than serving a static file. * Ability to use the same Haskell variables for both Hamlet and CSS.

I've started a new repo on Github[1]; I'm tentatively calling the project "stylish".

This sounds pretty interesting. I wrote a Ruby tool called Stylish [1] a couple of years ago to solve a similar set of problems, and have occasionally wondered about rewriting it in Haskell. I look forward to seeing what you come up with. One potentially useful feature is generating code that requires browser prefixes (-webkit-border-radius etc.). There's also potential for generating minified versions of the code, concatenating multiple stylesheets etc.—it's a lot easier to do this stuff if you can programmatically manipulate the stylesheet at run-time. Embedding assets (graphics) as data URIs is another thing; have a look at how something like Jammit [3] does this. There's also a Firefox and Thunderbird extension [2] called Stylish. Obviously you're free to call your project whatever you wish; I just thought I should let you know. Benedict. [1] http://ionfish.github.com/stylish [2] http://userstyles.org/stylish [3] http://documentcloud.github.com/jammit/#embedding

Quick update: I'm including the "Stylish" code in the hamlet package now, and renaming it to "Camlet" (CSS-hamlet). I'm also including something called "Jamlet", which doesn't do much besides variable interpolation. As you might guess, it's for Javascript. I mention it at the end of my most recent blog post[1]. Michael [1] http://www.snoyman.com/blog/entry/typesafe-runtime-hamlet/ On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 1:25 PM, Michael Snoyman wrote:

On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 12:28 PM, Benedict Eastaugh wrote:

...

On 6 August 2010 09:19, Michael Snoyman wrote:

...

After looking into sass a little bit, I've decided I like it ;). I see the following benefits of implementing something sass-like in Haskell via quasi-quotation:

* Compile-time guarantee of well-formedness. * The speed benefits of blaze-builder. Of course, this will still be slower than serving a static file. * Ability to use the same Haskell variables for both Hamlet and CSS.

I've started a new repo on Github[1]; I'm tentatively calling the project "stylish".

This sounds pretty interesting. I wrote a Ruby tool called Stylish [1] a couple of years ago to solve a similar set of problems, and have occasionally wondered about rewriting it in Haskell. I look forward to seeing what you come up with.

One potentially useful feature is generating code that requires browser prefixes (-webkit-border-radius etc.). There's also potential for generating minified versions of the code, concatenating multiple stylesheets etc.—it's a lot easier to do this stuff if you can programmatically manipulate the stylesheet at run-time. Embedding assets (graphics) as data URIs is another thing; have a look at how something like Jammit [3] does this.

As far as the border-radius kind of stuff: the approach I'm taking to mixins should make it possible to write a plain old Haskell function to output multiple border-radius statements. I might even include such a mixin in the main package.

Regarding concatenating stylesheets: I believe that would have to be handled at the level *above* Stylish; Yesod, for example, automatically concatenates all style statements added via the addStyle function.

There's also a Firefox and Thunderbird extension [2] called Stylish.

...

Obviously you're free to call your project whatever you wish; I just thought I should let you know.

I'm open to naming suggestions. Here's a few other ideas I'd had:

* sasslet: I don't really like too much, but makes clear the connection to Hamlet and Sass. * csser/cssar: pronounced "Caesar," might give Shakespeare fans something to chuckle at.

As it stands, I'm leaning fairly strongly towards including Stylish in the Hamlet package.

Michael

On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 1:03 PM, Tim Matthews wrote:

On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 9:20 PM, Michael Snoyman wrote:

...

Quick update: I'm including the "Stylish" code in the hamlet package now, and renaming it to "Camlet" (CSS-hamlet). I'm also including something called "Jamlet", which doesn't do much besides variable interpolation. As you might guess, it's for Javascript. I mention it at the end of my most recent blog post[1].

Michael

While It's just a name and not really important: hamlet was haml so I first imagined sasset, sasslet or another name from one of the works of Shakespeare but I then really liked stylish as I thought it would tell that something with solid foundations and theory could still appear, hip and pretty.

What is important though is the code. This is absolutely great and success just keeps getting harder to avoid.

This is by no means a final decision; I'm open to being convinced that other names are better. But I'll point out the main reason for the Camlet/Jamlet name choice: easy to remember and type. I found "stylish" to be much harder to get out than "camlet"; that might just be because I'm so used to hamlet already, but that's exactly my goal here: make these three templating systems work together nicely to make the developers life a little bit easier.

Michael

On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 4:00 AM, Michael Snoyman wrote:

On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 1:03 PM, Tim Matthews wrote:

...

On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 9:20 PM, Michael Snoyman wrote:

...

Quick update: I'm including the "Stylish" code in the hamlet package now, and renaming it to "Camlet" (CSS-hamlet). I'm also including something called "Jamlet", which doesn't do much besides variable interpolation. As you might guess, it's for Javascript. I mention it at the end of my most recent blog post[1]. Michael

While It's just a name and not really important: hamlet was haml so I first imagined sasset, sasslet or another name from one of the works of Shakespeare but I then really liked stylish as I thought it would tell that something with solid foundations and theory could still appear, hip and pretty.

What is important though is the code. This is absolutely great and success just keeps getting harder to avoid.

This is by no means a final decision; I'm open to being convinced that other names are better. But I'll point out the main reason for the Camlet/Jamlet name choice: easy to remember and type. I found "stylish" to be much harder to get out than "camlet"; that might just be because I'm so used to hamlet already, but that's exactly my goal here: make these three templating systems work together nicely to make the developers life a little bit easier. Michael _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe

CaSSius and JSaesar? Alex

Alexander Dunlap wrote:

CaSSius and JSaesar?

+1 for Cassius. -- Live well, ~wren

@Michael: Have you seen the JSMacro package on hackage? I think it might be a better fit as it adds some nice syntactic goodies to JS in addition to variable interpolation. Cheers. ~Liam On 9 August 2010 22:59, Michael Snoyman wrote:

OK, I declare myself officially unable to make a decision on this one: there's just too many good options ;). I beseech the community to aid me in my plight, by taking a survey on the names available[1].

Michael

[1] https://spreadsheets.google.com/viewform?formkey=dHVOU2p6OVRkcWVQVG10d01OWk8...

On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 8:19 AM, wren ng thornton wrote:

...

Alexander Dunlap wrote:

...

CaSSius and JSaesar?

+1 for Cassius.

-- Live well, ~wren

_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe

_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe