Using document.createElement to create elements and element.appendChild(node) to add them is tedious. But once you have abstractions in place, like var menu = createMenu(), subMenu=createMenu(), menu.add(subMenu) it becomes very powerful and more fun to work with the DOM.
No parser, just a bunch of JavaScript functions that nest nicely, to create dense and readable DOM generation code.
Might be time for putting a 1.0 sticker on it.
As for Bepis, the mechanism by which elements nest seem complicated, as far as I understand it is controlled by sprinkling , and . throughout the string, I don't get why this would be necessary.
The comma and dot seem weird; curly braces would feel more natural to me. In your example, style isn't terminated by a dot, but other one liners are, which I'm assuming is just a typo else I'm really confused.
I love me a good, simple, jokey template language. Reminds me of the one I made a few years back[1]. Everyone should write a small template language of their own - it's a neat parser-writing exercise, and the rendering implementation can be comparatively trivial (assuming you don't plan to actually use it in a place where rendering perf matters).
23 comments
[ 2.7 ms ] story [ 19.2 ms ] threadhttps://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Bepis
https://github.com/NoHatCoder/DOM_Maker
No parser, just a bunch of JavaScript functions that nest nicely, to create dense and readable DOM generation code.
Might be time for putting a 1.0 sticker on it.
As for Bepis, the mechanism by which elements nest seem complicated, as far as I understand it is controlled by sprinkling , and . throughout the string, I don't get why this would be necessary.
https://github.com/undecided/tg
(totally usable in vanilla JS too)
What's the advantage over JSX?
[1] http://ham.io/not.js/
[0] http://jade-lang.com/
[1] https://github.com/pugjs/pug
:-)