What is Pug and what are its top alternatives?
Pug, previously known as Jade, is a high-performance template engine heavily influenced by Haml and implemented with JavaScript for Node.js and browsers. It allows you to write HTML markup in a concise and expressive way by utilizing indentation to signify hierarchy. Pug supports features like mixins, includes, conditionals, loops, and filters to streamline the templating process. However, its strict syntax and significant whitespace requirement might be challenging for some developers.
- EJS: EJS is a simple templating language that lets you embed JavaScript into your HTML templates. Key features include support for loops, conditionals, and partials. Pros: easy to learn, flexible syntax. Cons: not as concise as Pug.
- Handlebars: Handlebars is a popular templating engine that focuses on semantic templates with a minimal syntax. Key features include helpers, partials, and block expressions. Pros: good documentation, widely used. Cons: lacks some advanced features of Pug.
- Twig: Twig is a flexible and powerful templating engine for PHP. Key features include template inheritance, macros, and filters. Pros: well-documented, maintained by Symfony. Cons: might have a learning curve for beginners.
- Nunjucks: Nunjucks is a rich feature template engine for JavaScript. Key features include macros, inheritance, and asynchronous support. Pros: powerful feature set, actively maintained. Cons: can be complex for simple projects.
- Liquid: Liquid is a Ruby-based template language used by Shopify. Key features include filters, tags, and custom variables. Pros: easy to use, good for e-commerce sites. Cons: limited outside of the Shopify ecosystem.
- Swig: Swig is a templating engine inspired by Django and Jinja2. Key features include template inheritance, auto-escaping, and filters. Pros: familiar syntax for Python developers. Cons: not as actively maintained as other alternatives.
- Nunjucks: Nunjucks is a rich feature template engine for JavaScript. Key features include macros, inheritance, and asynchronous support. Pros: powerful feature set, actively maintained. Cons: can be complex for simple projects.
- Slim: Slim is a lightweight templating engine for Ruby. Key features include concise syntax, support for mixins, and filters. Pros: extremely fast, great for small projects. Cons: limited compatibility compared to Pug.
- Hogan.js: Hogan.js is a compiled Mustache templating engine for JavaScript. Key features include logic-less templates, partials, and custom delimiters. Pros: fast rendering, supports precompiled templates. Cons: less feature-rich compared to Pug.
- Marko: Marko is a fast and lightweight HTML-based templating engine for Node.js. Key features include custom tags, reusable components, and server-side rendering. Pros: high performance, easy to set up. Cons: limited ecosystem compared to Pug.
Top Alternatives to Pug
EJSIt is a simple templating language that lets you generate HTML markup with plain JavaScript. No religiousness about how to organize things. No reinvention of iteration and control-flow. It's just plain JavaScript. ...
Handlebars.jsHandlebars.js is an extension to the Mustache templating language created by Chris Wanstrath. Handlebars.js and Mustache are both logicless templating languages that keep the view and the code separated like we all know they should be. ...
ReactLots of people use React as the V in MVC. Since React makes no assumptions about the rest of your technology stack, it's easy to try it out on a small feature in an existing project. ...
TypeScriptTypeScript is a language for application-scale JavaScript development. It's a typed superset of JavaScript that compiles to plain JavaScript. ...
MustacheMustache is a logic-less template syntax. It can be used for HTML, config files, source code - anything. It works by expanding tags in a template using values provided in a hash or object. We call it "logic-less" because there are no if statements, else clauses, or for loops. Instead there are only tags. Some tags are replaced with a value, some nothing, and others a series of values. ...
JinjaIt is a full featured template engine for Python. It has full unicode support, an optional integrated sandboxed execution environment, widely used and BSD licensed. ...
SmartyFacilitating the separation of presentation (HTML/CSS) from application logic. This implies that PHP code is application logic, and is separated from the presentation ...
Hogan.jsHogan.js is a 3.4k JS templating engine developed at Twitter. Use it as a part of your asset packager to compile templates ahead of time or include it in your browser to handle dynamic templates. ...
Pug alternatives & related posts
- For a beginner it's just plain javascript code6
- It'a easy to understand the concept behind it6
- You almost know how to use it from start3
- Quick for templating UI project3
related EJS posts
- Simple106
- Great templating language77
- Open source50
- Logicless36
- Integrates well into any codebase20
- Easy to create helper methods for complex scenarios10
- Created by Yehuda Katz7
- Easy For Fornt End Developers,learn backend2
- Awesome1
related Handlebars.js posts
- Components830
- Virtual dom672
- Performance578
- Simplicity507
- Composable442
- Data flow186
- Declarative166
- Isn't an mvc framework128
- Reactive updates120
- Explicit app state115
- JSX50
- Learn once, write everywhere29
- Easy to Use22
- Uni-directional data flow21
- Works great with Flux Architecture17
- Great perfomance11
- Javascript10
- Built by Facebook9
- TypeScript support8
- Speed6
- Server Side Rendering6
- Feels like the 90s5
- Excellent Documentation5
- Props5
- Functional5
- Easy as Lego5
- Closer to standard JavaScript and HTML than others5
- Cross-platform5
- Easy to start5
- Hooks5
- Awesome5
- Scalable5
- Super easy4
- Allows creating single page applications4
- Server side views4
- Sdfsdfsdf4
- Start simple4
- Strong Community4
- Fancy third party tools4
- Scales super well4
- Has arrow functions3
- Beautiful and Neat Component Management3
- Just the View of MVC3
- Simple, easy to reason about and makes you productive3
- Fast evolving3
- SSR3
- Great migration pathway for older systems3
- Rich ecosystem3
- Simple3
- Has functional components3
- Every decision architecture wise makes sense3
- Very gentle learning curve3
- Split your UI into components with one true state2
- Recharts2
- Permissively-licensed2
- Fragments2
- Sharable2
- Image upload2
- HTML-like2
- React hooks1
- Datatables1
- Requires discipline to keep architecture organized40
- No predefined way to structure your app29
- Need to be familiar with lots of third party packages28
- JSX13
- Not enterprise friendly10
- One-way binding only6
- State consistency with backend neglected3
- Bad Documentation3
- Error boundary is needed2
- Paradigms change too fast2
related React posts
I am starting to become a full-stack developer, by choosing and learning .NET Core for API Development, Angular CLI / React for UI Development, MongoDB for database, as it a NoSQL DB and Flutter / React Native for Mobile App Development. Using Postman, Markdown and Visual Studio Code for development.
I picked up an idea to develop and it was no brainer I had to go with React for the frontend. I was faced with challenges when it came to what component framework to use. I had worked extensively with Material-UI but I needed something different that would offer me wider range of well customized components (I became pretty slow at styling). I brought in Evergreen after several sampling and reads online but again, after several prototype development against Evergreen—since I was using TypeScript and I had to import custom Type, it felt exhaustive. After I validated Evergreen with the designs of the idea I was developing, I also noticed I might have to do a lot of styling. I later stumbled on Material Kit, the one specifically made for React . It was promising with beautifully crafted components, most of which fits into the designs pages I had on ground.
A major problem of Material Kit for me is it isn't written in TypeScript and there isn't any plans to support its TypeScript version. I rolled up my sleeve and started converting their components to TypeScript and if you'll ask me, I am still on it.
In summary, I used the Create React App with TypeScript support and I am spending some time converting Material Kit to TypeScript before I start developing against it. All of these components are going to be hosted on Bit.
If you feel I am crazy or I have gotten something wrong, I'll be willing to listen to your opinion. Also, if you want to have a share of whatever TypeScript version of Material Kit I end up coming up with, let me know.
TypeScript
- More intuitive and type safe javascript174
- Type safe106
- JavaScript superset80
- The best AltJS ever48
- Best AltJS for BackEnd27
- Powerful type system, including generics & JS features15
- Compile time errors11
- Nice and seamless hybrid of static and dynamic typing11
- Aligned with ES development for compatibility10
- Angular7
- Structural, rather than nominal, subtyping7
- Starts and ends with JavaScript5
- Garbage collection1
- Code may look heavy and confusing5
- Hype4
related TypeScript posts
Our first experience with .NET core was when we developed our OSS feature management platform - Tweek (https://github.com/soluto/tweek). We wanted to create a solution that is able to run anywhere (super important for OSS), has excellent performance characteristics and can fit in a multi-container architecture. We decided to implement our rule engine processor in F# , our main service was implemented in C# and other components were built using JavaScript / TypeScript and Go.
Visual Studio Code worked really well for us as well, it worked well with all our polyglot services and the .Net core integration had great cross-platform developer experience (to be fair, F# was a bit trickier) - actually, each of our team members used a different OS (Ubuntu, macos, windows). Our production deployment ran for a time on Docker Swarm until we've decided to adopt Kubernetes with almost seamless migration process.
After our positive experience of running .Net core workloads in containers and developing Tweek's .Net services on non-windows machines, C# had gained back some of its popularity (originally lost to Node.js), and other teams have been using it for developing microservices, k8s sidecars (like https://github.com/Soluto/airbag), cli tools, serverless functions and other projects...
I picked up an idea to develop and it was no brainer I had to go with React for the frontend. I was faced with challenges when it came to what component framework to use. I had worked extensively with Material-UI but I needed something different that would offer me wider range of well customized components (I became pretty slow at styling). I brought in Evergreen after several sampling and reads online but again, after several prototype development against Evergreen—since I was using TypeScript and I had to import custom Type, it felt exhaustive. After I validated Evergreen with the designs of the idea I was developing, I also noticed I might have to do a lot of styling. I later stumbled on Material Kit, the one specifically made for React . It was promising with beautifully crafted components, most of which fits into the designs pages I had on ground.
A major problem of Material Kit for me is it isn't written in TypeScript and there isn't any plans to support its TypeScript version. I rolled up my sleeve and started converting their components to TypeScript and if you'll ask me, I am still on it.
In summary, I used the Create React App with TypeScript support and I am spending some time converting Material Kit to TypeScript before I start developing against it. All of these components are going to be hosted on Bit.
If you feel I am crazy or I have gotten something wrong, I'll be willing to listen to your opinion. Also, if you want to have a share of whatever TypeScript version of Material Kit I end up coming up with, let me know.
- Dead simple templating29
- Open source12
- Small8
- Support in lots of languages1
related Mustache posts
- It is simple to use7
related Jinja posts
I have learned both Python and JavaScript. I also tried my hand at Django. But i found it difficult to work with Django, on frontend its Jinja format is very confusing and limited. I have not tried Node.js yet and unsure which tool to go ahead with. I want an internship as soon as possible so please answer keeping that in mind.
related Smarty posts
- Lightweight3