I got the following email in response to my TT2 article. I know nothing
about EmbPerl so I can't really answer these points. Does anyone who has
used EmbPerl have any ammo that I can use in my reply?
Dave...
----- Forwarded message from [snip] -----
Howdy,
I'm curious why you prefer the TT to EmbPerl? It seems that the capabilities
of TT are a strict subset of EmbPerl. Granted the syntax is arguably slightly
easier at first than EmbPerl, it doesn't seem worth the lesser functionality
and forcing of data manipulation in the calling space.
We use EmbPerl extensively at DejaNews and taught the minimal amounts to
all of the HTML folks designers and programmers. No one had any difficulty
w/ '@' or '%' so much as the concept of an array or a hash. That is to say
that no one had syntactic difficulties, just structural.
So, it seems that if there is a movement to establish a module in the same
ranks as LWP, CGI, DBI, XML::Parser and the like that it would be better as
EmbedPerl than the Template Toolkit.
Thoughts?
Cheers,
----- End forwarded message -----
--
http://www.dave.org.uk | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<plug>Data Munging with Perl
<http://www.manning.com/cross/></plug>
