sablono

Random thoughts: As far as I understand it, CSS is declarative. JavaScript, not so much. The declarative aspect of CSS is nice; you just specify what you want and CSS handles everything else for you. I am also idly wondering how this would all work out in "HTML and CSS as s-expressions" à la Ŝablono https://github.com/r0man/sablono

Hiccup is a pleasure to use. Everything from template inheritance to view-layer functions become trivial to do yourself since it's just some datastructures. Using the same tools (paredit) to edit html that you use to edit Clojure makes html finally tolerable. However, its big drawback is that it's unsafe by default. You have to opt in to escaping everything you send through it. Though I believe Reagent's Hiccup-like syntax and https://github.com/r0man/sablono (for Om) are safe.

I am using Sablono https://github.com/r0man/sablono a lot. It is a very thin wrapper around the basic react components. IMHO I would advise getting to know React before jumping into frameworks. It's a pretty simple model and incredibly powerful on its own. That being said I think Om is a wonderful framework. But its good to understand React outside of Om.

There are actually two main React libraries for ClojureScript, Om[1] and Reagent[2]. There are also other libraries for doing the templating if you prefer hiccup[3] or enlive[4] style templates, which I find a bit more readable than straight function calls. Overall though, React seems to be shaping up as a great solution for building reactive templates that isn't tied into larger frameworks like the solutions within AngularJS or Ember.js. [1]: https://github.com/swannodette/om [2]: https://github.com/holmsand/reagent [3]: https://github.com/r0man/sablono [4]: https://github.com/ckirkendall/kioo

It's cool, you don't have to use JSX, you can just use the React.DOM functions. Or build a backend for whatever your preferred template system is, as long as the backend ends up creating nodes of React.DOM objects. Or you go with Om[0] and use EDN[1], Enlive-style[2] or hiccup-style[3] tempting. Now if you want to physically separate the view logic and the corresponding markup generation, that's more debatable: they're extremely strongly coupled (and in fairly small chunks ideally) so you often can't trivially change one without the other, and thus keeping them together makes logical sense. See Pete Hunt's presentation which lumpypua linked, it tries to make that point fairly nicely. [0] https://github.com/swannodette/om [1] https://github.com/edn-format/edn [2] https://github.com/ckirkendall/kioo [3] https://github.com/r0man/sablono

You can use Hiccup style with Om via sablono if you like via http://github.com/r0man/sablono. Om will never dictate nor provide an alternate syntax layer as everyone will want something different. I personally don't care for Hiccup. More importantly, Cloact is much closer to the React model while Om diverges quite a bit because we're interested in enabling patterns that are more difficult otherwise, trivial complete UI state rewind on exceptions/errors, trivial undo, and more powerful operations on the applicate state history oriented at interactive debugging and development. Of course these values might not interest you and you just want a simple direct mapping onto React. Then Cloact looks awesome! :)

Looks like Sablono, which provides a Hiccup-style syntax you can use with Om, is your best bet there: https://github.com/r0man/sablono