A. Pagaltzis wrote:
* Karen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-10-21 03:40]:
Plus, how many Mason-only or TT-only modules are there out
there? More than there are H::T-only modules, right? You can
hardly begrudge us H::T users *our* occasional exclusives, can
you?
Personally, I’m not picking sides. I don’t know what sort of
devil rode me when I picked TT, but despite initial experience it
turned out to be terrible. H::T had seemed appealing until I
tried it, before TT. Right now I am thinking that Mason or Petal
might be lesser evils (in different ways), but Mason puts me off
because it is full of framework gunk and Petal’s minilanguage is
about as bad as minilanguages can be. As far as I’m concerned,
for generating markup, every last one of the templating modules
on CPAN is dreadful. I’d rather not be needlessly forced into
*any* of them.
So what would you use? The major ones for C::A are TT and H::T and you
don't like either. Mason does not play very well at the CGI level which
is one reason I don't use it. Play there means performance wise. You
really need mod_perl to use it right. Petal is out as well, though I
have never tried that one.
I use both TT and H::T depending on the project. I love the fact that I
can just install C::A and get H::T and hit the ground running.
I have only seen you post things you don't like. So, what would you use?
Robert
##### CGI::Application community mailing list ################
## ##
## To unsubscribe, or change your message delivery options, ##
## visit: http://www.erlbaum.net/mailman/listinfo/cgiapp ##
## ##
## Web archive: http://www.erlbaum.net/pipermail/cgiapp/ ##
## Wiki: http://cgiapp.erlbaum.net/ ##
## ##
################################################################
