[cgiapp] Templates and display logic (was Re: [cgiapp] Re: CGI::App::DBH or Ima::DBI))

2004-01-27 Thread Michael Graham
[BTW, thanks to all of you for the advice on using template systems. Very interesting discussion and lots of useful info.] > What are other specific features that would make TT attractive to an > H::T user? I haven't actually used TT or H::T much, but I've used a lot of custom templating systems

[cgiapp] [ANNOUNCE] Config::DBI - database connection support via Config::ApacheFormat files

2004-01-27 Thread Terrence Brannon
NAME Config::DBI - database connection support via Config::ApacheFormat files SYNOPSIS In .cshrc: setenv DBI_CONF dbi.conf In dbi.conf: # Pass may be a password, or in which case, the password is # is prompted for: Pass # Connect attribute # dbi_connect_method is a stand

Re: [cgiapp] Re: CGI::App::DBH or Ima::DBI

2004-01-27 Thread Terrence Brannon
Mark Stosberg wrote: Could you say more about this William? I usually inline my SQL. The one time I tried to abstract out of the code, I felt like it was an extra layer of abstraction that made the code harder to understand and debug without benefits that exceeded that. What specific benefits do y

Re: [cgiapp] Re: CGI::App::DBH or Ima::DBI

2004-01-27 Thread Terrence Brannon
William McKee wrote: After initial joy of abstracting my SQL, I grew to hate the DBIx::Recordset API because I couldn't understand my own code when I went back to code after several months. 1 - if your recordset calls were wrapped in a descriptive function name, perhaps the inability to unders

Re: [cgiapp] Template::Toolkit Plugins

2004-01-27 Thread Stephen Howard
As a TT user my own uses tend to be less plugin oriented, but are pretty heavy on display logic. My application generally takes user requests for data resources, makes sure the user is allowed to make such a request, and hands them back the requested data resources if everything checks out. A

Re: [cgiapp] Re: CGI::App::DBH or Ima::DBI

2004-01-27 Thread Cees Hek
Mark Stosberg wrote: What are other specific features that would make TT attractive to an H::T user? Someone already mentioned the ability to more easily reference objects. What are some other favorite features that get used frequently? Like I have mentioned in a previous email, my main reason for

[cgiapp] Template::Toolkit Plugins (was: Re: CGI::App::DBH or Ima::DBI)

2004-01-27 Thread Mark Stosberg
On 2004-01-28, Brett Sanger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > With H::T I would find myself having to revise the C::A application when > a display requirement changed, which broke the whole concept for me. > (Granted, our display requirements changed fairly often, but that's a > buisness reality where

Re: [cgiapp] Re: CGI::App::DBH or Ima::DBI

2004-01-27 Thread Brett Sanger
> What are other specific features that would make TT attractive to an > H::T user? Someone already mentioned the ability to more easily > reference objects. What are some other favorite features that get used > frequently? For me, referencing objects is useful. The biggest draw, however, is plug

[cgiapp] Re: CGI::App::DBH or Ima::DBI

2004-01-27 Thread Mark Stosberg
On 2004-01-23, petersm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Not to keep harping on the subject, but this is also possible with > CheesePizaa::TemplateLoader. Would it possible to abstract this module so it's useful with DBI and H::T, without using the rest of the CheesePizza framework? It seems useful a

[cgiapp] Re: CGI::App::DBH or Ima::DBI

2004-01-27 Thread Mark Stosberg
On 2004-01-28, Brett Sanger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I have to agree with the other poster that C::A/TT is far more like > C::A/H::T than a "server-page" paradigm. > > TT does have a lot more processing features, and some people do put the > application into the page, but a good many of us (a

Re: [cgiapp] Re: CGI::App::DBH or Ima::DBI

2004-01-27 Thread Brett Sanger
> >> However, I think some people here will agree that CGI::App/H::T is a > >> popular alternative to the server-page paradigm that TT is built on. > > > > That caught my attention as I'm missing the distinction. Isn't > > server-page more Mason/PHP/JSP? TT and H::T are in the same camp, seems

[cgiapp] Re: CGI::App::DBH or Ima::DBI

2004-01-27 Thread Mark Stosberg
On 2004-01-23, Bill Moseley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yesterday Mark Stosberg wrote: > >> However, I think some people here will agree that CGI::App/H::T is a >> popular alternative to the server-page paradigm that TT is built on. > > That caught my attention as I'm missing the distinction. Isn

Re: [cgiapp] Re: Another framework: CGI::Application::Plus

2004-01-27 Thread Domizio Demichelis
thank you for your detailed answer: > I missed that part of the documentation. It is a bit confusing because > in one sentance you say "this module pass all the tests of > CGI::Application 3.1", but then later on you say, "This module implements > on purpose a little but useful difference that s

RE: [cgiapp] Perl 5.8.2 from AS

2004-01-27 Thread Bob Hicks
Ugh. I am the idiot here. I was testing CGI vs. CGI::Simple and then got sidetracked for a month or so. I had even forgot I subclassed it! Serves me right! Thank you for helping. > -Original Message- > From: Cees Hek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2004 5:19 PM >

Re: [cgiapp] Perl 5.8.2 from AS

2004-01-27 Thread Cees Hek
Bob Hicks wrote: I have 5.8.2.808 and I am only using CGI-Application and HTML-Template. I am going to do a reinstall of Apache to see if that is a problem as well. I should have reread the Subject and I would have realized you were using 5.8.2... Ah! From the log: [Mon Jan 26 14:12:29 2004] [e

Re: [cgiapp] Re: CGI::App::DBH or Ima::DBI

2004-01-27 Thread Sam Tregar
On Tue, 27 Jan 2004, Terrence Brannon wrote: > Brett Sanger wrote: > > > > (I believe that H::T > >currently beats all comers in speed, for example, but intentionally > >leaves out some features I want in larger projects). > > HTML::Embperl 2.0 is written in C so it is probably the fastest. Have

RE: [cgiapp] Perl 5.8.2 from AS

2004-01-27 Thread Bob Hicks
I have 5.8.2.808 and I am only using CGI-Application and HTML-Template. I am going to do a reinstall of Apache to see if that is a problem as well. Ah! From the log: [Mon Jan 26 14:12:29 2004] [error] [client 127.0.0.1] Premature end of script headers: c:/apache/users/webapp/index.cgi [Mon Jan

Re: [cgiapp] Re: CGI::App::DBH or Ima::DBI

2004-01-27 Thread Cees Hek
Terrence Brannon wrote: Brett Sanger wrote: (I believe that H::T currently beats all comers in speed, for example, but intentionally leaves out some features I want in larger projects). HTML::Embperl 2.0 is written in C so it is probably the fastest. If anyone is interested in some actual benc

Re: [cgiapp] Perl 5.8.2 from AS

2004-01-27 Thread Cees Hek
Bob Hicks wrote: Is there a problem with CGI-Application and the latest download from ActiveState? I can run a regular CGI script from the same folder/directory that my CGI-App index.cgi is in. The CGI-App doesn't work. The only change (it was working before) was updating to the latest AS distro. C

Re: [cgiapp] Re: CGI::App::DBH or Ima::DBI

2004-01-27 Thread Terrence Brannon
Brett Sanger wrote: (I believe that H::T currently beats all comers in speed, for example, but intentionally leaves out some features I want in larger projects). HTML::Embperl 2.0 is written in C so it is probably the fastest. --

[cgiapp] Perl 5.8.2 from AS

2004-01-27 Thread Bob Hicks
Is there a problem with CGI-Application and the latest download from ActiveState? I can run a regular CGI script from the same folder/directory that my CGI-App index.cgi is in. The CGI-App doesn't work. The only change (it was working before) was updating to the latest AS distro. Robert ---

Re: [cgiapp] Re: Another framework: CGI::Application::Plus

2004-01-27 Thread Cees Hek
Domizio Demichelis wrote: I think Domizio's case is similar, even though it's not a sub-class, because it passes all the current CGI::App tests. I would be careful about stating that it passes all the tests, because I don't believe it does. The failures seem to be minimal but they are there. it'

Re: [cgiapp] Re: Another framework: CGI::Application::Plus

2004-01-27 Thread Domizio Demichelis
>> I think Domizio's case is similar, even though it's not a sub-class, >> because it passes all the current CGI::App tests. >> > I would be careful about stating that it passes all the tests, because I > don't believe it does. The failures seem to be minimal but they are > there. it's not a matt

Re: [cgiapp] Re: Another framework: CGI::Application::Plus

2004-01-27 Thread Domizio Demichelis
> I think Domizio's case is similar, even though it's not a sub-class, > because it passes all the current CGI::App tests. Even sub-classes can > break when the original module changes. (This happened to WWW::Mechanize > recently). In Domizio's case, his app wouldn't break if CGI::App changed > in

[cgiapp] Re: Another framework: CGI::Application::Plus

2004-01-27 Thread Mark Stosberg
On 2004-01-27, Cees Hek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Mark Stosberg wrote: >> I highly agree that something like ::Variant would be useful. For my own >> case, I might try to break the changes in my sub-class into several >> pieces, each of which would be separate from the others. I think that >> wo

Re: [cgiapp] Re: Another framework: CGI::Application::Plus

2004-01-27 Thread Cees Hek
Mark Stosberg wrote: I highly agree that something like ::Variant would be useful. For my own case, I might try to break the changes in my sub-class into several pieces, each of which would be separate from the others. I think that would make them all easier to name, and more valuable to others who

Re: [cgiapp] Reloading C::A in modperl

2004-01-27 Thread Stewart C. Russell
Richard Dice wrote: Apart from that, to use Apache::Reload, you need to put a reference to it in *every* file that you want to have reloaded. And I've found you have to restart Apache anyway, since it doesn't -- in my installation at least -- seem to do very much except generate gobs of error lo

[cgiapp] Re: Another framework: CGI::Application::Plus

2004-01-27 Thread Mark Stosberg
On 2004-01-27, David A Golden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This is why I was thinking CGI::App::Variant would be a good namespace for > things of this type as the term "variant" is directly evocative of what it > is intended to be: a variant. Variants might be straightforward subclasses > of C:

Re: [cgiapp] Reloading C::A in modperl

2004-01-27 Thread Richard Dice
Before I send it to mod_perl list I put it here because the problem mainly concerns C::A. No, not really. To the degree that you are having problems with Apache::Reload, this is a mod_perl/Apache::Reload problem. But the problem that the error message you gave us pertains to a basic Perl syntax

[cgiapp] Reloading C::A in modperl

2004-01-27 Thread Wojciech Pietron
Perl v5.6.0 for Apache/1.3.29 (Unix) mod_perl/1.29 CGI::Application 3.1 Apache::Reload 0.07 Before I send it to mod_perl list I put it here because the problem mainly concerns C::A. There is a testing environment: tester.cgi: == #!/usr/local/bin/perl -w use Tester; my $webapp = Teste

Re: [cgiapp] Re: Another framework: CGI::Application::Plus

2004-01-27 Thread Domizio Demichelis
Re-thinking about your post... > I think the fear, rather founded or not, is that makes it more confusing > for people looking for a solution, when there are several similar > options. If you saw two modules that looked like a good fit, and one was > named "Plus", then it might same like the "::Pl