How much faster is SLIM compared to HAML? [closed]

Question

As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.

Closed 8 years ago.

I'm trying to convince my team members to use SLIM instead of HAML because I like SLIM's syntax a lot more. I was promised that we would change to SLIM if it was really a lot faster than HAML as I read here and here, but I don't know how recent these benchmarks are, so I wanted to know whether anybody has some real life experience with this topic?

I am also not really sure which of the benchmarks (compiled, tilt compiled, cached, uncached) does mean the most, as I don't know what exactly will be used when a Rails application is in production mode (where the speed is the most needed).

Thanks a lot for more information about this topic!

Answer 1

Slim is about 5 to 10 times faster in production mode. The releavant benchmark is the compiled and tilt compiled mode. Uncached is not relevant in production because it benchmarks the parser performance.