Hi,
I think mostly it is about having standards and in a business env making it
so that people who only know part of the picture can still work on the
project as a whole. Sounds like OOP huh? HTML in perl scripts just messes
that whole thing up, like I said before, our fearless leader can mess up
stuff now because HTML is in the scripts and he then edits the scripts,
messes *something* up and we have to fix it.(I an new btw just started 3
weeks ago and am cleaning up the mess). Well then, put the HTML in a
module, fine you can do that, but then why not make a system that makes
doing that basic idea easy? And even a system that once you choose to use it
will not get altered and played with by every programer on staff.
I do agree about the CGI pm stuff though. It is goofy to use print header
instead of print content type but still that is getting kind of anal. If it
really matters to your scripts then that would be kind of weird.
Thanks for your thoughts,
Eric
At 01:28 PM 6/16/02 -0400, Dodger wrote:
><soapbox>
>
>Grr. Why can't people just write bloody applications with HTML in them
>instead of spending so much energy tryuing to find a way to avoid writing
>any HTML?
>
>I mean, it's not that hard. Formulate what you want parts to do, make a sort
>of vanilla, unformatted output here-doc ior template file for each part as
>necessary, get the functionality going, then prety it up by copying each
>here-doc or template file into Dreamweaver or something, formatting the HTML
>to look nice, and then moving the formattted html back in.
>
>Template. Mason. Yecch. I feel mildly nauseated every time I hear about
>stuff like Mason and similar cop-outs. If people would spend half the time
>learning to output their own HTML that they do trying to find ways around
>doing so, they'd get a lot more programs written, and there would be less
>ugly, clunky, messy, badly-interfacd, hard-to-use and ungodly slow web
>applications out there.
>
>I'm still distastefully amazed when I find people using CGI.pm to print a
>content-type header on something that in no other way uses CGI.pm, has no
>cookies, or anything else. Yes, I have actually seen someone use CGI to do
>nothign more than dump their environment variables, when a simple;
>
>print "Content-type:
>text/html\n\n<dl>\n",map("<dt>$_</dt>\n<dd>$ENV{%_}</dd>\n", sort keys
>%ENV),"</dl>\n";
>
>would do the job perfectly fine.
>
></soapbox>
http://www.kwinternet.com/eric
(250) 655 - 9513 (PST Time Zone)
"Inquiry is fatal to certainty." -- Will Durant
