Type of html
type-of-html is a library for generating html in a highly
performant, modular and type safe manner.
Please look at the documentation of the module for an overview of the api: Html
Note that you need at least ghc 8.2.
Typesafety
Part of the html spec is encoded at the typelevel, turning a lot of mistakes into type errors.
Let's check out the /type safety/ in ghci:
>>> Td :> Tr :> "a"
<interactive>:1:1: error:
β’ tr is not a valid child of td.
β’ In the expression: Td :> Tr :> "a"
In an equation for βitβ: it = Td :> Tr :> "a"
<interactive>:1:7: error:
β’ Char is not a valid child of tr.
β’ In the second argument of β(:>)β, namely βTr :> "a"β
In the expression: Td :> Tr :> "a"
In an equation for βitβ: it = Td :> Tr :> "a"
>>> Tr :> Td :> "a"
<tr><td>a</td></tr>And
>>> Td :@ CoordsA "a" :> "b"
<interactive>:1:1: error:
β’ coords is not a valid attribute of td.
β’ In the first argument of β(:>)β, namely βTd :@ CoordsA "a"β
In the expression: Td :@ CoordsA "a" :> "b"
In an equation for βitβ: it = Td :@ CoordsA "a" :> "b"
>>> Td :@ IdA "a" :> "b"
<td id="a">b</td>Every parent child relation of html elements is checked against the specification of html and non conforming elements result in compile errors.
The same is true for html attributes.
The checking is a bit lenient at the moment:
- some elements can't contain itself as any descendant: at the moment we look only at direct children. This allows some (quite exotic) invalid html documents.
- some elements change their permitted content based on attributes: we always allow content as if all relevant attributes are set.
Never the less: these cases are seldom. In the vast majority of cases you're only allowed to construct valid html. These restrictions aren't fundamental, they could be turned into compile time errors. Perhaps a future version will be even more strict.
Modularity
Html documents are just ordinary haskell values which can be composed or abstracted over:
>>> let table xxs = Table :> map (\xs -> Tr :> map (\x -> Td :> x) xs) xxs
>>> table [["A","B"],["C"]]
<table><tr><td>A</td><td>B</td></tr><tr><td>C</td></tr></table>
>>> import Data.Char
>>> Html :> Body :> table (map (\c -> [[c], show $ ord c]) ['a'..'d'])
<html><body><table><tr><td>a</td><td>97</td></tr><tr><td>b</td><td>98</td></tr><tr><td>c</td><td>99</td></tr><tr><td>d</td><td>100</td></tr></table></body></html>And here's an example module:
module Main where
import Html
main :: IO ()
main
= print
. page
$ map (Td :>) [1..(10::Int)]
where page tds =
Div :@ (ClassA "qux" # IdA "baz")
:> ( Div :> "foo"
# Div :> "bar"
# Table :> Tr :> tds
)Please note that the type of page is inferable and quite
complicated. I strongly suggest that you don't write type signatures
for type-of-html. Define your type-of-html related functions in an
extra module in which you deactivate missing to signature
warnings. For smaller tasks you can easily define your page in a where
clause like above.
All text will be automatically html escaped:
>>> I :> "&"
<i>&</i>
>>> Div :@ IdA ">" :> ()
<div id=">"></div>If you want to opt out, wrap your types into the 'Raw' constructor. This will increase performance, but can be only used with trusted input. You can use this e.g. to embed some blaze-html code into type-of-html.
>>> I :> Raw "</i><script></script><i>"
<i></i><script></script><i></i>Controlflow
You can use Either and Maybe in your documents:
>>> Div :> Just (Div :> "a")
<div><div>a</div></div>
>>> Div :> if True then Nothing else Just (Div :> "b")
<div></div>
>>> Div :> if True then Left (Div :> "a") else Right "b"
<div><div>a</div></div>
>>> Div :@ (if True then Right (IdA "a") else Left (ClassA "a")) :> "b"
<div id="a">b</div>If you use Either, both possible outcomes are typechecked if they are valid children.
You can combine Either, Maybe and Lists in any way you want. The types will get jolly complicated, but if you don't write the types, you'll be good.
Performance
type-of-html is a lot faster than blaze-html or than lucid.
Look at the following benchmarks:
Remember this benchmark from blaze-html?
This is comparing blaze with type-of-html:
To look at the exact code of this benchmark look into the repo. The big table benchmark here is only a 50x10 table. Using a 1000x10 table like on the blaze homepage yields even better relative performance, but would make the other benchmarks unreadable. The synthetic page is just a small page with a lot of elements and a lot of attributes but with minimal text. The hackage upload benchmark is a rendering of https://hackage.haskell.org/upload which contains a lot of text.
Note how the compactHTML rendering is about 150 times faster than
blaze for the real world case. Look below for the explanation of the
difference between type-of-html and compactHTML.
How is this possible? We supercompile lots of parts of the generation process. This is possible thanks to the new features of GHC 8.2: AppendSymbol. We represent tags and attributes as kinds and map these to (a :: [Symbol]) and then fold all neighbouring Symbols with AppendSymbol. Afterwards we reify the Symbols with symbolVal which will be embedded in the executable as Addr#. All this happens at compile time. At runtime we do only generate the content and append Builders. Because all functions from this library get inlined, we'll automatically profit from future optimizations in ByteString.Builder.
For example, if you write:
renderText $ Tr :> Td :> "test"The compiler does optimize it to the following (well, unpackCString# doesn't exist for Builder, so it's slightly more complicated):
decodeUtf8 $ toLazyByteString
( Data.ByteString.Builder.unpackCString# "<tr><td>"#
<> builderCString# "test"#
<> Data.ByteString.Builder.unpackCString# "</tr>"#
)Note that the compiler automatically sees that your string literal
doesn't need utf8 and converts directly the "test"# :: Addr# to an
escaped Builder without any intermediate structure, not even an
allocated bytestring.
renderByteString $ Tr :> Td :> "teΕΏt"Results in
toLazyByteString
( Data.ByteString.Builder.unpackCString# "<tr><td>"#
<> encodeUtf8BuilderEscaped prim (Data.Text.unpackCString# "te\\197\\191t"#)
<> Data.ByteString.Builder.unpackCString# "</tr>"#
)If you write
renderBuilder $ Div :> DivThe compiler does optimize it to the following:
Data.ByteString.Builder.unpackCString# "<div><div></div></div>"#This sort of compiletime optimization isn't for free, it'll increase compilation times.
Note that compiling with -O2 results in a ~25% faster binary than
with -O and compiling with -O0 compiles about 15 times faster, so
be sure that you develop with -O0 and benchmark or deploy with
-O2. Be aware, that cabal compiles only with -O if you don't
specify explicitly otherwise.
Even faster
Need for speed? Consider following advise, which is sorted in ascending order of perf gains:
If you've got attributes or contents of length 1, use a Char.
This allows for a more efficient conversion to builder, because we know the length at compile time.
Div :> 'a'If you know for sure that you don't need escaping, use Raw.
This allows for a more efficient conversion to builder, because we don't need to escape.
Div :> Raw "abc"If you've got numeric attributes or contents, don't convert it to a string.
This allows for a more efficient conversion to builder, because we don't need to escape and don't need to handle utf8.
Div :> (42 :: Int)If you know that an attribute or child is empty, use () or omit it altogether.
This allows for more compile time appending and avoids two runtime appends.
Div :> ()If you know for sure a string at compile time which doesn't need
escaping, use a Proxy Symbol.
This allows for more compile time appending and avoids two runtime appends, escaping and conversion to a builder.
Div :> (Proxy @"hello")These techniques can have dramatic performance implications,
especially the last two. If you replace for example in the big page with attributes benchmark every string with a Proxy Symbol, it'll run
in 10 ns which is 500 times faster than blaze-html. Looking at core
shows that this is equivalent of directly embedding the entire
resulting html as bytestring in the binary and is therefore the
fastest possible output.
CompactHTML
You can use an even more performant representation if you can sacrifice some flexibility. If every variable of your html document is just some type which will be converted into a Builder, you can render your entire html document as a list of ByteString which will be cached by ghc and interspersed with variables. This will be in a lot of cases orders of magnitude faster. This is especially the case with larger pages. For very small pages (let's say upto 5 elements) this technique is slower.
{-# LANGUAGE TypeApplications #-}
{-# LANGUAGE DataKinds #-}
import Html
test x y = Div :> ("Hello, my name is: " # x)
# Div :> ("I'm of age: " # y)
-- It is important that your CompactHTML is a top-level value.
myDoc :: CompactHTML ["name", "age"]
myDoc = compactHTML $ test (V @"name") (V @"age")
main :: IO ()
main = putStrLn $ renderCompactString myDoc (Put "Bob") (Put (42 :: Int))You can easily investigate your CompactHTML in ghci thanks to a colorful prettified show instance:
>>> myDoc
"<div>Hello, my name is: "
name
"</div><div>I'm of age: "
age
"</div>"Custom Attributes and Elements
You can define your own attributes, for example data-* or htmx. These custom attributes reside as well 100% at the type level and don't incur any performance penalty. Beware that it is up to you to choose a valid attribute name.
{-# LANGUAGE TypeFamilies #-}
{-# LANGUAGE DataKinds #-}
module Main where
import Html
newtype instance Attribute
"data-name" -- name for rendering
'True -- global attribute
v -- value
= DataNameA v
data instance Attribute
"person-vegan" -- name for rendering
'True -- global attribute
() -- boolean attribute
= PersonVeganA
main :: IO ()
main = print $ Div :@ (DataNameA "foo" # PersonVeganA) :> "bar"Please note that you have to use newtype instance for attributes with
values and data instance for boolean attribute. Otherwise you'll get
a compiler error about roles.
And you can define your custom elements:
{-# LANGUAGE TypeFamilies #-}
{-# LANGUAGE DataKinds #-}
module Main where
import Html
data instance Element
"banana" -- name for rendering
'[Flow, Phrasing] -- content categories
Flow -- content model
'["async", "for"] -- allowed attributes besides global attributes
= Banana
main :: IO ()
main = print $ Banana :@ AsyncA "foo" :> "bar"Notation
If you want a bit cleaner notation which resembles blaze, you can use the language pragma rebindable syntax:
{-# OPTIONS_GHC -fno-warn-missing-signatures -fno-warn-unused-do-bind -fno-warn-name-shadowing #-}
{-# LANGUAGE NoMonomorphismRestriction #-}
{-# LANGUAGE RebindableSyntax #-}
import Prelude
import Html
main :: IO ()
main = print $
Html :> do
Body :> do
H1 :@ IdA "a" :> do
Img
Strong :@ ClassA "b" :> (0 :: Int)
Div :> do
Div :@ IdA "c" :> (1 :: Int)
Div :> do
Form :@ ClassA "d" :> do
Fieldset :> do
Div :@ IdA "e" :> do
Div :> do
Label :@ ClassA "f" :> "a"
Select :> do
Option :@ IdA "g" :> "b"
Option :> "c"
Div :@ ClassA "h" :> "d"
I :> "a"
Button :@ IdA "i" :> do
I :> "e"
where
(>>) = (#)If you are on GHC 9.0 or newer, you can also use the QualifiedDo language extension via
{-# OPTIONS_GHC -fno-warn-unused-do-bind #-}
{-# LANGUAGE QualifiedDo #-}
import Prelude
import Html
import qualified Html.QualifiedDo as H
main :: IO ()
main = print $
Html :> H.do
Body :> H.do
H1 :@ IdA "a" :> H.do
Img
Strong :@ ClassA "b" :> (0 :: Int)
Div :> H.do
Div :@ IdA "c" :> (1 :: Int)
Div :> H.do
Form :@ ClassA "d" :> H.do
Fieldset :> H.do
Div :@ IdA "e" :> H.do
Div :> H.do
Label :@ ClassA "f" :> "a"
Select :> H.do
Option :@ IdA "g" :> "b"
Option :> "c"
Div :@ ClassA "h" :> "d"
I :> "a"
Button :@ IdA "i" :> H.do
I :> "e"Comparision to lucid and blaze-html
Advantages of type-of-html:
- more or less 10 times faster on a medium sized page
- a lot higher type safety: nearly no invalid document is inhabited
- fewer dependencies
Disadvantages of 'type-of-html':
- a bit noisy syntax (don't write types!)
- sometimes unusual type error messages
- compile times (30sec for a medium sized page, with
-O0only ~2sec) - needs at least ghc 8.2
- you may need to specify {-# OPTIONS_GHC -freduction-depth=0 #-}
I'd generally recommend that you put your documents into an extra
module to avoid frequent recompilations. Additionally you can use
type-of-html within an blaze-html document and vice versa. This
allows you to gradually migrate, or only write the hotpath in a more
efficient representation.
Example usage
If you'd like to see a full fledged example, go to following module from the benchmarks of this library:
It is a verbatim implementation of the source of http://hackage.haskell.org/upload
If you wish, you can compare the clarity of the code with an implementation in blaze:
I'd argue that the source code in type-of-html has some visual advantages:
- qualified imports aren't needed
- it's more consistent, e.g. no spurious underscores (e.g.
rel_vsref) - clearer distinction between data and functions, in
type-of-htmlelements and attributes are capitalized
Note that the type of hackageUpload is quite big (about 1kLOC of type signature), so don't even bother to ask ghci :).
FAQ
Why don't you provide a pretty printer?
It's sadly not possible to pretty print html source in a semantic preserving way. If you add before every tag a newline and indentation, the following happens:
<i>a</i><em>b</em><i>
a
</i>
<em>
b
</em>This would add a space when rendering. So perhaps we'll avoid all
these text modifying tags, but now look at <pre>. Every whitespace
and newline within is semantically important. And even if we avoid
modifying stuff within <pre>, there is the nasty css property
white-space: pre;. With this, all bets are off to modify any
indenting, because we can't know which css will apply to the document:
- It may include a link, so it would be dynamic.
- There might be meddling javascript.
- The user of the browser is free to activate a custom css.
If we go creative, there is still one option:
<div
><div
>Hello World!</div
></div
>This would be semantically correct, but would this be pretty?
I recommend, that if you want to debug html, use mozilla fire bug, so you can as well fold trees and look at the rendering.
Why don't you keep track of appended tag lengths at compile time?
Well, it's true that we could improve performance a miniscule by that: by knowing the length of the string, we could just use internal bytestring functions to copy over the addr#. This would avoid a ccall to determine the length of the addr# more or less per tag.
At the other hand, luckily ghc moves all these bytestrings to the toplevel in core, so we have this cost only the first time we use this bytestring. Considering that most webpages have a lot more than one visitor, this dwarfs the cost (about 3 nanoseconds) a lot.
The negative side of doing this would be a severe complication for the typechecker, which is already quite stressed with this library.
Besides, there is a ghc ticket about replacing compile time strings (addr#) with bytearray#, which contains it's length. So in some future, we'll have this for free.
Wouldn't it be more efficient to append all compile time stuff to one huge Symbol and use '[(Nat,Nat)] to slice it?
Cool idea, but no. This would reduce memory fragmentation and avoid a terminating null more or less per tag at the cost of the lost of sharing. Being unable to inspect a Symbol, we would end up with a lot of repetitions, which are at the moment shared. Even the bytestring, which is used for the Symbol, is shared of equal Symbols.
Isn't there any performance tweak left?
As far as I know: no. If you disagree, please file an issue.