Hogan.js vs Liquid

Overview

Hogan.js

Stacks358

Followers56

Votes3

GitHub Stars5.1K

Forks431

Liquid

Stacks261

Followers126

Votes0

GitHub Stars11.5K

Forks1.5K

Hogan.js vs Liquid: What are the differences?

In web development, choosing the right templating engine is crucial for efficient front-end development. Hogan.js and Liquid are two popular templating engines that offer unique features and functionalities. Below are the key differences between Hogan.js and Liquid.

Syntax: Hogan.js uses Mustache syntax which is simple, lightweight, and easy to understand, whereas Liquid uses its own unique syntax that is more verbose and allows for more specific template logic.
Variables: Hogan.js allows for simple variable handling within templates without any complex operations, while Liquid provides more advanced variable filters and functions for manipulating data within the template.
Control Structures: Hogan.js offers basic control structures such as conditional statements and loops, while Liquid provides a wider range of control structures including case statements, nested loops, and more complex conditional logic.
Extensibility: Hogan.js is not as extensible as Liquid, which allows for the creation of custom tags, filters, and extensions to tailor the templating engine to specific project needs.
Usage: Hogan.js is more commonly used in Node.js environments, while Liquid is widely used in Shopify and Jekyll platforms due to its compatibility and integrated functionalities.
Error Handling: Hogan.js provides better error handling with clear error messages and stack traces, making it easier to debug templates, whereas Liquid's error messages can be more cryptic and harder to troubleshoot.

In Summary, when choosing between Hogan.js and Liquid, consider factors such as syntax simplicity, variable manipulation, control structures, extensibility, platform compatibility, and error handling to make an informed decision for your project.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs

CLI (Node.js)

Manual

Advice on Hogan.js, Liquid

Asad

Software Engineer at Lisec Automation

Jun 15, 2020

Needs adviceon

.NET

Handlebars.js

@All: I am searching for the best template engine for .NET. I started looking into several template engines, including the Dotliquid, Handlebars.js, Scriban, and Razorlight. I found handlebar a bit difficult to use when using the loops and condition because you need to register for helper first. DotLiquid and Scriban were easy to use and in Razorlight I did not find the example for loops.

Can you please suggest which template engine is best suited for the use of conditional/list and looping and why? Or if anybody could provide me a resource or link where I can compare which is best?

Thanks In Advance

240k views240k

Comments

Detailed Comparison

Hogan.js	Liquid
Hogan.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.	It is an open-source template language written in Ruby. It is the backbone of Shopify themes and is used to load dynamic content on storefronts. It is safe, customer facing template language for flexible web apps.
-	Render templates directly from the database;Smarty (PHP) style template engines;Template engine which does HTML just as well as emails;Allow your users to edit the appearance of your application but don't want them to run insecure code on your server
Statistics
GitHub Stars 5.1K	GitHub Stars 11.5K
GitHub Forks 431	GitHub Forks 1.5K
Stacks 358	Stacks 261
Followers 56	Followers 126
Votes 3	Votes 0
Pros & Cons
Pros 3 Lightweight	No community feedback yet
Integrations
Mustache	VTEX Zendesk Voog Drip Ruby Jekyll Fedora Locomotive CMS

What are some alternatives to Hogan.js, Liquid?

TypeScript

TypeScript is a language for application-scale JavaScript development. It's a typed superset of JavaScript that compiles to plain JavaScript.

Pug

This project was formerly known as "Jade." Pug is a high performance template engine heavily influenced by Haml and implemented with JavaScript for Node.js and browsers.

Handlebars.js

Handlebars.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.

Mustache

Mustache 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.

Slim Lang

Slim is a template language whose goal is to reduce the view syntax to the essential parts without becoming cryptic. It started as an exercise to see how much could be removed from a standard html template (<, >, closing tags, etc...). As more people took an interest in Slim, the functionality grew and so did the flexibility of the syntax.

RactiveJS

Ractive was originally created at theguardian.com to produce news applications. Ractive takes your Mustache templates and transforms them into a lightweight representation of the DOM – then when your data changes, it intelligently updates the real DOM.

EJS

It 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.

Jinja

It is a full featured template engine for Python. It has full unicode support, an optional integrated sandboxed execution environment, widely used and BSD licensed.

Twig

It is a modern template engine for PHP. It is flexible, fast, and secure. Its syntax originates from Jinja and Django templates.

Nunjucks

Rich Powerful language with block inheritance, autoescaping, macros, asynchronous control, and more. Heavily inspired by jinja2. It supports all modern browsers.

Related Comparisons

Hogan.js vs Liquid: What are the differences?

Syntax: Hogan.js uses Mustache syntax which is simple, lightweight, and easy to understand, whereas Liquid uses its own unique syntax that is more verbose and allows for more specific template logic.
Variables: Hogan.js allows for simple variable handling within templates without any complex operations, while Liquid provides more advanced variable filters and functions for manipulating data within the template.
Control Structures: Hogan.js offers basic control structures such as conditional statements and loops, while Liquid provides a wider range of control structures including case statements, nested loops, and more complex conditional logic.
Extensibility: Hogan.js is not as extensible as Liquid, which allows for the creation of custom tags, filters, and extensions to tailor the templating engine to specific project needs.
Usage: Hogan.js is more commonly used in Node.js environments, while Liquid is widely used in Shopify and Jekyll platforms due to its compatibility and integrated functionalities.
Error Handling: Hogan.js provides better error handling with clear error messages and stack traces, making it easier to debug templates, whereas Liquid's error messages can be more cryptic and harder to troubleshoot.

Hogan.js vs Liquid

Overview