> I do think your question is more justification for the small
> refactoring I proposed a couple of weeks ago (to pull out the
> hard-coded "HTML::Template" into a constant method). Ah well.
This "use case" does make the patch look more attractive. I'm warming
up to it. There /are/ several H::T compatible modules, and you are right
that it would make related plugins simpler.
Also, someone might want to privately sub-class H::T themselves, and it
would be nice not to have to copy/paste load_tmpl() to use it.
One concern I have had about adding new, rarely-used methods is making
the docs more complicated.
But, having Titanium as additional layer helps with that now. "Advanced"
functions can be documented only in CGI::Application, while Titanium
focuses on being more user-friendly, in part by not documenting every
option.
Last time I asked for other opinions on your patch no one else offered
any. Last call for comments?
Mark
--
http://mark.stosberg.com/
##### 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/ ##
## ##
################################################################
