Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Mustache vs Pug vs TypeScript: What are the differences?
# Introduction
Your task is to perform the following actions:
- Format everything as Markdown code that can be used in a website.
- Provide the Key differences between Mustache and Pug and TypeScript . Be specific
- Differences should not be more than 6. Be specific.
- Each difference should be in a single paragraph
- Extract and remove generic/declarative sentence
- Subheadings must be bold and in number points not bullet points
- Summary should be in one line only
1. **Syntax**: Mustache uses {{ }} for templating, while Pug uses indentation to denote structure, and TypeScript enforces statically typed syntax.
2. **Functionality**: Mustache is logicless and primarily focuses on data binding, Pug allows for more complex logic and operations, and TypeScript provides type checking during compile time.
3. **Extensibility**: Mustache is limited in its functionality and requires additional libraries for advanced features, Pug has built-in features like mixins and includes for modularity, while TypeScript supports class-based inheritance and interfaces for structuring code.
4. **Error Handling**: Mustache may not provide detailed error messages, Pug offers more descriptive error messages during compilation, and TypeScript catches potential errors at compile time, reducing runtime errors.
5. **Rendering Speed**: Mustache's rendering speed might be slower due to its simple logic, Pug's compilation process can be faster because of its concise syntax, and TypeScript’s transpilation process might take longer but results in optimized JavaScript code.
6. **Community Support**: Mustache has been adopted widely across various languages, Pug has a robust community supporting its development and offering plugins, while TypeScript has strong community backing from Microsoft and many open-source contributors.
In Summary, the key differences between Mustache, Pug, and TypeScript lie in their syntax, functionality, extensibility, error handling, rendering speed, and community support.
From a StackShare community member: "We are looking to rewrite our outdated front-end with TypeScript. Right now we have a mix of CoffeeScript and vanilla JavaScript. I have read that adopting TypeScript can help enforce better code quality, and best practices. I also heard good things about Flow (JS). Which one would you recommend and why?"
I use TypeScript because:
- incredible developer tooling and community support
- actively developed and supported by Microsoft (yes, I like Microsoft) ;)
- easier to make sense of a TS codebase because the annotations provide so much more context than plain JS
- refactors become easier (VSCode has superb support for TS)
I've switched back and forth between TS and Flow and decided a year ago to abandon Flow completely in favor of TS. I don't want to bash Flow, however, my main grievances are very poor tooling (editor integration leaves much to be desired), a slower release cycle, and subpar docs and community support.
I use TypeScript because it isn't just about validating the types I'm expecting to receive though that is a huge part of it too. Flow (JS) seems to be a type system only. TypeScript also allows you to use the latest features of JavaScript while also providing the type checking. To be fair to Flow (JS), I have not used it, but likely wouldn't have due to the additional features I get from TypeScript.
We originally (in 2017) started rewriting our platform from JavaScript to Flow (JS) but found the library support for Flow was lacking. After switching gears to TypeScript we've never looked back. At this point we're finding that frontend and backend libraries are supporting TypeScript out of the box and where the support is missing that the commuity is typically got a solution in hand.
I use TypeScript because the tooling is more mature (the decision to discontinue TSLint in favor of moving all its checks to ESLint is a thoughtful and mature decision), there's a ton of examples and tutorials for it, and it just generally seems to be where the industry is headed. Flow (JS) is a fine tool, but it just hasn't seen the uptake that TS has, and as a result is lacking a lot of the nicer small things, like thorough Visual Studio Code integration, offered by TS.
We currently use TypeScript at work. Previously we used Flow (JS) but it was sometimes really difficult to make the types work the way you want. Especially non-trivial types were problematic. And the IDE support wasn't good, Flow took too much resources and sometimes remain stuck and do not show errors (I use Visual Studio Code). With TypeScript we almost do not have these problems. IDE support is superb, working with types is much easier and typing system seems more mature and powerful. There are some downsides (like partion inheritance etc.), but TS team is still pushing it forward. So for me TypeScript is clear winner.
We use Underscore because it's a reasonable library for providing all the reasonable helper functions missing from JavaScript ES5 (or that perform poorly if you use the default ES5 version).
Since we're migrating the codebase to TypeScript , we'll likely end up removing most usage of it and ultimately no longer needing it, but we've been very happy with the library.
I use TypeScript for Web Applications and for both frontend and backend because it has a lot of tooling around it and they really got the types and type safety right. Flow (JS) on the other hand lacks tooling and most of the times I scramble to find the right way of building my contracts in which TypeScript is very intuitive and natural. Additionally TypeScript is very similar to Java so your backend engineers and full stack engineers can work with it without much of context switch.
The only time I think Flow shines is (based on probably my outdated knowledge) Flow is/was the only option if you want/wanted to build a React Native application mainly because React Native transpiler at the time I was working with it would only work with flow.
I use TypeScript because it's adoption by many developers, it's supported by many companies, and it's growth. AngularJS, React, @ASP.NET Core. I started using it in .NET Core, then for a job. Later I added more Angular experience and wrote more React software. It makes your code easier to understand and read... which means it makes other people's code easier to understand and read.
If you will start a project from scratch I recommend to use TypeScript. But, If you work with legacy projects written in JavaScript I recommend Flow (JS). Both tools have the same objective: reduce the bad code (which create illegible code, generate bugs e problems to maintenance). Flex helps you to avoid fall in bad codes, but TypeScript prevent you to c you to create bad codes. I believe cause this some JavaScript fans don't like TS, because TS block you to write some types o code. This is the fundamental difference between TS and Flow: Flow avoid problems, but no force. TS force you to prevent problems.
I use TypeScript because it's the most mature/issue-free Javascript type-checker available, as far as I've seen.
I use TypeScript because of broad support, on tools, repos, community ... the only reason to consider flow is if you're a facebook employee
I use TypeScript because I tried both on a Meteor project, and found the quantity of errors it enabled us to catch and the simplification of code it allowed was higher than Flow (JS).
I recommend TypeScript. When used correctly, TypeScript can enable your application to be scalable, easy to refactor, safe, and stable. One of the biggest draws of working with any typed language is that it forces you to think about your functions' inputs and outputs. This is invaluable as it can lead to more declarative, functional style code that ultimately can be easier to reason about.
TypeScript is however not a silver bullet. Just like anything new it takes time to fully understand the concepts of types, interfaces, abstract classes, and enums. In my experience engineers who excel when using TypeScript are those who have experience working with a statically typed language.
I use TypeScript because i love to program in Angular and used in node as well
As our codebase grew in size, we were looking for ways to improve code quality. We chose TypeScript over Flow due to its rapid industry adoption and overall tools support.
We noticed how different open-source projects were migrating from Flow to TypeScript. Most notably, it was Jest, even though Jest and Flow were both developed by Facebook. See this HN thread if you want to dive into an interesting discussion around this move.
Additionally, at the beginning of 2019, both Babel and ESLint enabled seamless TypeScript support, which allowed easy migration path in a backward-compatible way.
Initially making a decision to use Flow vs Typescript we decided to go with flow as we wanted our code to run in a way we wrote it, because when using Flow types are simply removed from the code without modifying the code itself. Sadly, the type system of Flow was in some cases very hard to understand and declare the types correctly, especially in cases when the structure is very dynamic (e.g. object keys and values are created dynamically). Another reason was bad integration with IDE and frequent crashes which made DX very poor. Therefore, we made another evaluation of Typescript and decided to move towards it. As our code base was pretty big when we decided to migrate to TS we couldn't just stop and re-write everything, that's why we started writing new modules in Typescript as well as transforming old components. To make that possible we had to configure Webpack loader to support simultaneous bundling of Flow&JS and Typescript. After around 2 months of the transformation we have around 40% of code being written in Typescript and we are more than happy with integration TS has with IDE, as well as ease of declaring types for dynamic modules and functions.
Pros of Mustache
- Dead simple templating29
- Open source12
- Small8
- Support in lots of languages1
Pros of Pug
- Elegant html138
- Great with nodejs90
- Open source59
- Very short syntax59
- Structured with indentation54
- Free25
- Really similar to Slim (from Ruby fame)6
- It's not HAML6
- Gulp6
- Clean syntax5
- Readable code5
- Easy setup5
- Difficult For Front End Developers,learn backend5
- Disdain for angled brackets4
Pros of 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
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of Mustache
Cons of Pug
Cons of TypeScript
- Code may look heavy and confusing5
- Hype4
Sign up to add or upvote consMake informed product decisions
What is Mustache?
What is Pug?
What is TypeScript?
Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions
What tools integrate with Mustache?
Sign up to get full access to all the tool integrationsMake informed product decisions
Blog Posts
+32
+17
+13
+25