Steve Purkis
Tue, 19 Jun 2001 06:08:52 -0700
David Cantrell wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 19, 2001 at 10:20:37AM +0100, Steve Purkis wrote: > > David Cantrell wrote: > > of course the line > > will never be 100% clear & cut-out... And as for inventing new wheels - > > well we're all coders & scientists & engineers here... That's what we > > do! > > Well yeah, and it's fun too, but in this case the new wheel is not > necessary. And if I'm building this for your company, I think you'd > rather I spent time writing a kick-ass application (which would of > course be maintainable, extensible, scalable and all sorts of other > laudable -ables) rather than spending the same amount of time writing > a kick-ass mini-language (or learning someone else's mini-language) > and a mediocre app. Agreed (though, people will sneak things like this in anyway!). But I think if you can convince your boss that spending 1 mo developing a templating system (or any set of tools, really) that you believe will increase your productivity by a large %, then you should go for it. But I stipulate: only if there's a valid business reason. And it's all the researching into what other people have done that really takes time. (as an aside: Maybe there's a real need for evaluation of modules / systems here which CPAN doesn't [can't?] cover... If I say something like `Certified', how many flames will I get? ;-) > > I see where you're coming from, but think about how this will be abused > > - coders will get lazy and eventually just embed all the business logic > > in the templates. > > Yes, they will. Unless you have proper procedures in place to prevent > it. Luckily, perl makes it rather easy to encapsulate application logic > elsewhere. Unfortunately, Perl's flexibility also makes it hard to develop procedures for ;-) > > I'd argue that embedding code in your templates is on the way out, and > > the sooner it goes the better. > > So how do you think it can be achieved? Mmm. Might have to re-phrase that - "... embedding *native* code in your templates ...". So I'm saying asp, jsp, etc.. are good attempts, but at opposite ends of the spectrum. We need a more central solution. So to answer your question... (Steve gulps at the risk of being shot for not reading the rest of this thread...): In general, I think tools like TT are going down the right path. But I think that, ultimately, this problem can be solved by introducing a simple java/ECMA-script like language into the ``html'' layer purely for presentation logic and access to application data. The language and how the application feeds data into the Somethin-script datastructures would have to be spec'd outside of Perl (for obvious reasons - it's not Perl!). Combine this in some fashion with XSL and you've got yourself a generic [perhaps over generic?] way of delivering what marketeers like to call dynamic content. The quick alternative to this is to build javascript data structures with your application & use JS in combination with DHTML to generate the pages clientside. (disclaimer: i may have been on crack when i wrote this ;-) Anyway, if you combine the scripting idea with something that's been kicking around in my head for the past year - namely that Perl needs a good `Application Server' in order to compete in the high end of the market - then you've got some more `ground breaking technology' (read: SuperCoolWheel v3.0! ;) for the Marketeers to yabber on about, and potentially a useful set of tools for us developers. Of course, as you point out above, who in their right mind would pay for a new wheel when you could be making your company money instead? Even though there's a potentially *huge* market for this, that's still one problem I can't solve. regards, -- Steve Purkis [EMAIL PROTECTED] t: +44 (0) 207 614 8600 Unix Developer red | hot | chilli f: +44 (0) 207 614 8601