But I'm now frequently wondering if we haven't overgrown the mustache language for our templates.
Are there any better alternatives to mustache?
No idea
we could go "full Ruby". Basically Mustache is a thin layer on top of Ruby, that was then reimplemented. You can do some very crazy stuff in Ruby with a templating language. I used to use Erb: https://puppet.com/docs/puppet/5.5/lang_template_erb.html
is there nothing good in OCaml?
I'm not asking because of opinions on OCaml vs Ruby
I just know opam
better than gem
or bundler
— my yearly googling of how to bundle
is a pain
(this is not my cleverest opinion and you should feel free to ignore it, but other users might have the same problem?)
Not that I aware of. Btw, We don't even have mustache + yaml support in OCaml. The OCaml mustache implementation takes only json in, afair
I agree with the concern that Ruby might be a bit far off for a community that is most used to functional languages and Coq and OCaml in particular.
@Anton Trunov is mustache + yaml well specified somewhere? Otherwise, I think you can just convert yaml to json and proceed
@Rudi Grinberg I'm only aware of this man page http://mustache.github.io/mustache.1.html
Looks like this is the spec: https://github.com/mustache/spec
I see. Well it shouldn't be too hard to add this support for the mustache implementation in OCaml. It's just a shame that it will incur a fairly heavy dependency on ocaml-yaml (C bindings).
Yaml is absolutely a beast to deal with, so many languages only have implementations wrapping C bindings...
another argument for using YAML is that we have other configuration files in Coq projects that already use it, namely the ones for Docker-Coq Action and Travis.
I'm not sure I could stay sane in an environment with 3-4 different configuration file languages
Last updated: Jun 03 2023 at 17:29 UTC