Hi there,
I discovered catalyst while looking for a simple JavaScript code snippet
to activate a checkbox immediately. I read a bit on cpan and Catalyst
seems to use some of my favorite perl glue, like DBI, CGI, and Template
toolkit.
But do I want a full blown framework?
Or do I just want a
On 27/10/06, Jeremiah Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi there,I discovered catalyst while looking for a simple _javascript_ code snippetto activate a checkbox immediately. I read a bit on cpan and Catalystseems to use some of my favorite perl glue, like DBI, CGI, and Template
toolkit.But do I
Jeremiah Foster ha scritto:
Hi there,
I discovered catalyst while looking for a simple JavaScript code snippet
to activate a checkbox immediately. I read a bit on cpan and Catalyst
seems to use some of my favorite perl glue, like DBI, CGI, and Template
toolkit.
But do I want a full blown
Hello,
I'd never used TT, so you might be even more at home.
I have been trying to decide what is the best 'View' to use with
Catalyst and it is so difficult to get an up-to-date comparison that I
can understand of the main views available for Perl (TT, Mason,
others?).
I know this is a
solve the problem you have today ...
On 10/27/06, Marcello Romani [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jeremiah Foster ha scritto:
Hi there,
I discovered catalyst while looking for a simple JavaScript code snippet
to activate a checkbox immediately. I read a bit on cpan and Catalyst
seems to use some
Hermida, Leandro [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hello,
I'd never used TT, so you might be even more at home.
I have been trying to decide what is the best 'View' to use with
Catalyst and it is so difficult to get an up-to-date comparison that I
can understand of the main views available for
Yep. That fixed it. Thanks.
On 10/26/06, Jesse Sheidlower - [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Oct 26, 2006 at 11:55:37AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've done a couple of Catalyst installs in the last few days, one on
OS X and one on Ubuntu Linux, both using the cat-install script.
Thank you very much! I haven't used Windoze for a long time so I wasn't
even aware of the fact until I tried to demo my first take on this site
to the client, you can imagine the disaster!On 10/24/06, Nilson Santos Figueiredo Junior [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/24/06, Alejandro Imass [EMAIL
TT. Mostly beacuse I have access to catalyst context here. I've tried to
use ClearSilver but it was too simple for me (almost every controller
needed additional 10-20 lines of code).
Keep in mind that although ClearSilver isn't as syntactically
expressive, it is *much* faster. There's a
On 10/26/06, Fayland Lam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Matt S Trout wrote:
Fayland Lam wrote:
Lee Standen wrote:
It's a subroutine, right?
Tried a return?such as:
$c-res-redirect('http://www.yahoo.com');
return undef;
Indeed I want to run the 'while' loop in backend. 'return' would not
On Fri, 2006-10-27 at 10:56 -0500, Jonathan Rockway wrote:
Keep in mind that although ClearSilver isn't as syntactically
expressive, it is *much* faster. There's a reason Google and Yahoo use
ClearSilver and not TT.
I had lunch with Rasmus Lerdorf at ApacheCon a couple weeks ago and he
told
Perrin Harkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 10/27/2006 11:26:14 AM:
On Fri, 2006-10-27 at 10:56 -0500, Jonathan Rockway wrote:
Keep in mind that although ClearSilver isn't as syntactically
expressive, it is *much* faster. There's a reason Google and Yahoo use
ClearSilver and not TT.
On Fri, 2006-10-27 at 11:41 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I guess: s/Google and Yahoo use ClearSilver and not TT./Google uses
ClearSilver and Yahoo is no where near #1 in search (php)./
The only thing I see mention of Google using it for is Google Groups,
their Usenet thing. Yahoo gets
Why don't I _ever_ hear about Mason on this list? How is TT better than
Mason anyway?
...not meaning to start a flame war...
Perrin Harkins wrote:
On Fri, 2006-10-27 at 11:41 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I guess: s/Google and Yahoo use ClearSilver and not TT./Google uses
ClearSilver
Jonathan Rockway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
TT. Mostly beacuse I have access to catalyst context here. I've tried to
use ClearSilver but it was too simple for me (almost every controller
needed additional 10-20 lines of code).
Keep in mind that although ClearSilver isn't as syntactically
Max Afonov wrote:
Why don't I _ever_ hear about Mason on this list? How is TT better than
Mason anyway?
...not meaning to start a flame war...
Mostly because mason becomes an unreadable mess, just like PHP. Take a
look at the RT source code, or my clever example here:
Mason:
table% my
This just isn't true. First and foremost, why does your Mason template
even think about considering direct usage of DBI? In a table tag? With
a raw SQL query? Can't one set $c-stash-{rowset} to whatever DBIC
returns, and then declare:
%args
$rowset
/%args
Suddenly, the $rowset is
Max Afonov wrote:
This just isn't true. First and foremost, why does your Mason template
even think about considering direct usage of DBI? In a table tag? With
a raw SQL query? Can't one set $c-stash-{rowset} to whatever DBIC
returns, and then declare:
%args
$rowset
/%args
Suddenly,
-Original Message-
From: Jonathan Rockway [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 27, 2006 11:03 AM
To: The elegant MVC web framework
Subject: [Catalyst] template comparison (was: why not mason (was:
somethingelse unrelated))
Max Afonov wrote:
Why don't I _ever_ hear about
There's no doubt about that. Bad design can turn any project into a
horrible quagmire. One can even treat Catalyst as a glorified CGI.pm and
never really use any of the MVC goodness. And don't even get me started
on TT having a whole different syntax, one that could be easier taught
to web
On Fri, 2006-10-27 at 13:14 -0400, Max Afonov wrote:
Why don't I _ever_ hear about Mason on this list?
Possibly because if you already use Mason, you don't have much use for
Catalyst, and vice versa? There's a lot of overlap in functionality
between the two, especially in terms of controller
On 10/27/06, Max Afonov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why don't I _ever_ hear about Mason on this list?It does come up and there are people using Mason with Catalyst. As for why Mason may be mentioned less than TT, it could simply be that Cat+Mason users have fewere questions ;)
How is TT better than
* Jonathan Rockway [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-10-27 20:10]:
Mostly because mason becomes an unreadable mess, just like PHP.
Take a look at the RT source code, or my clever example here:
Mason:
table% my $sth = $dbh-prepare('SELECT columns FROM table WHERE
something=1'); for($row =
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 13:02:47 -0500, Jonathan wrote:
Mason:
table% my $sth = $dbh-prepare('SELECT columns FROM table WHERE
something=1'); for($row = $sth-fetchrow_arrayref){ %/table
[...]
TT (in Cat with DBIC):
table
[% WHILE (row = rows.next) %]
tr
td[% row.name | html %]/tdtd[%
I need to launch a long-running (minutes up to hours) background program
from Catalyst. I have it working almost well enough - I do the usual
double-fork, closing standard file descriptors, and had to take some
particular care to use POSIX::_exit and put an eval{} around the daemon
code so that
On 10/27/06, Jon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I need to launch a long-running (minutes up to hours) background program
from Catalyst. I have it working almost well enough - I do the usual
double-fork, closing standard file descriptors, and had to take some
particular care to use POSIX::_exit and
A. Pagaltzis wrote:
TT2 provides a single minilanguage for both, which is
unnecessarily powerful and verbose for the 18% and way
underpowered for the 2%.
You're only supposed to use the TT language for simple things. Hairy
things are supposed to be encapsulated in plugins, written in Perl.
27 matches
Mail list logo
