On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 12:10 PM, Ashley Pond V <[email protected]> wrote:
> I use FormFu and have no problem with it and there is ultimately no > difference between doing things in config or in code, it's all code > and rendering in the end and HTML forms and form processing is just a > messy business no matter what you do. I find config files a very clean > way to reuse parts of forms and fieldsets and such. Doing that with > Roles or inheritance seems messier to me. > This is actually why my current project likes HFH over FormFu. We're already thinking very heavily in terms of Moose, so HFH's design is a logical extension. Config files in FormFu ended up feeling like another domain-specific language that everyone had to learn, and we had enough of those already (templates, half-assed vendor-provided interfaces to their awful systems, etc). Not saying that either way is good or bad. I've used both HFH and FormFu on different projects and liked both, and there is merit to how FormFu does it in many other situations. Haven't used Rose::HTML::* personally but a glance at the docs looks comparable to HFH. To answer the OP, there is no "best", only "different". The choice you make is highly subjective and will come down to project considerations. > I have been very curious about other approaches, including FormHandler > but a casual read of the docs gives no compelling reason to switch There isn't one. They are all pretty even in functionality, they simply do things differently. Either you're using one already and should keep using it, or you haven't picked (like OP) and should evaluate them all carefully to see which is the best fit for your needs. The Perl mantra *is* TIMTOWTDI, after all. -- Stephen Clouse <[email protected]>
_______________________________________________ List: [email protected] Listinfo: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/catalyst Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/
