Sergio Mijares

Agreed. That would be a benefit for sure.

There are many ways to write web applications, and you pointed out some of the tools and languages. Depending on your priorities, your choices may vary.

If the performance is a priority and simplicity is desired, Cloudgizer may be a better choice.

When different software pieces (such as the ones you mentioned) are put together, typically the complexity goes up, performance goes down, interoperability is almost never 100%, and more skills are needed. This means the cost goes up and time to market is longer.

Cloudgizer integrates pieces needed to build enterprise web applications. When you look at it that way, inline HTML is cleaner and faster than doing it by mixing up tools and frameworks, unless you want to for some reason.

The barrier to entry is low in a number of ways.

To start with, Cloudgizer is a C framework, so even though it has add-on constructs, it's not a new language, rather the end result of pre-processing is always pure C code.

The simplicity comes from things like inline HTML and HTML-like markups. Simpler is better. Plus the infrastructure details are taken care of.

The goal is for a beginner to get an intuitive grasp of the code in seconds. This is feasible with Cloudgizer, because C language is the basis for most other languages, and HTML is used by a very broad group of people.

While many languages and tools have good performance or even "close" performance, it is safe to say none is as good as C. The same goes for achieving a small footprint, which is desirable but commonly neglected.

Web languages and tools are often frameworks built as virtual machines, p-code generators, interpreters, and then frameworks are built on top of such frameworks. The loss of performance and the bloat are on the rise. Especially with hardware not keeping up with the bloat, and due to fundamental physics limitations, it's getting worse.

For cloud applications, high performance and low footprint are only going to get more important when it comes to power usage, the price of hardware and the happiness of end-user.

In a legacy web application, a company would get its own dedicated server with resources to spare.

In the cloud, money matters more. And, lowering the cost isn't just a financial issue. Less power and less hardware means less pollution and less garbage.

Using C as a core language serves also the purpose of utility, which is important as far as confidence in being able to get things done. Being true and tried and with large number of quality libraries (especially open source), C delivers in utility. And C linkage is ubiquitous even if the library you want isn't written in C.

Consider the clarity of debugging with other web frameworks. In any language other than C, there are layers of abstraction that make direct debugging more round-about than it needs to be.

Cryptic messages from layers of interpreters, virtual machines and frameworks on top of frameworks aren't easy to deal with. This means you don't need help from people who wrote the framework(s) because there is nothing between you and the final code that runs your application.

Finally, and as way of illustration of the above, the web template system you mentioned (liquid) is written in Ruby, which is in turn written in C. Go language is written in C too.

Why not use C to start with, and circumvent the performance, footprint, stability, interoperability and usability issues in the first place, if you can make web development in C richer, easier, safer and more productive? That's what Cloudgizer is all about.