On Thu, Apr 18, 2002 at 09:23:30AM +0000, Rafiq Ismail (ADMIN) wrote: > I need some quick references and points, if anyone is free.
I don't know Mason particularly well so I can't really give a fair critique. However, one of the main points that I think goes in TT's favour is that it allows you to separate application code from the presentation interface. In Mason you put your Perl code and HTML markup in the same file. In TT you are encouraged (but not forcecd) to put your HTML and *presentation* logic in templates, and your Perl and *application* logic in separate plugins, modules, subroutines or whatever. This makes is much easier to develop, maintain and update application and presentation code separately. You can run the same application code simultaneously with a dozen different front ends, and you can reuse the same presentation templates across a dozen different backend applications. > I'd appreciate some pointers about session management > approaches vs Mason custom. Again, I'm not sure how Mason does it, but I suspect that it's the same as for TT: you just use whatever fine session management module you need, be is Apache::Session, Cache::Cache, or your own custom code. Both Mason and TT are geared towards reuse of existing Perl modules rather than reinventing these particular wheels. > Also about companies using Template Off the top of my head, these are just some of the companies/organisations who I've heard are using or have used TT: Slashdot.org ticketmaster.com Playboy.com US Census Web Site Human Genome Project BBC Online Emap Online Canon Fotango.com KnowledgePool.com stonehenge.com (Mason convert :-) ...and no doubt many others. In fact I've been meaning to start a list on the web site. Anyone else out there care to add a few names? A
