Excellent work Paul!
I've been waiting for the anticipated 2.15 release...
It's creeping quite close to the top of my TODO list. I didn't get any
feedback from 2.14a. Did anyone try it out? Paging Mr Warnock! Please
pick up the white courtesy telephone... :-)
So the first big question: Is there room for two engines that implement
the Template Toolkit specification?
I've certainly got no objections. Heck, there are 40+ Perl template
modules that _don't_ implement the TT spec, so I'm all in favour of
increasing our number!
Next question. If I do release it - should I go to lengths to support all
of the extended options that TT uses?
Nah. I wouldn't bother if I were you. It strikes me that what you've
got here is a slightly simpler and stripped down version of TT. I'd
make a virtue of that rather than weighing it down with all of TT's baggage.
And besides, all those cranky old options are going to change for TT3.
Whether I release a separate module or not, the TT dev team (mostly
Andy) will be welcome to cut out what ever portions of code they may
find useful.
I certainly will. Can you post a link to the code?
Finally - Is releasing this premature? Will TT3's speed increase? Is
increasing the speed a factor for anybody else? Does anybody even
care if there is another module?
I think "yes" to all of those. First, from a purely selfish point of
view I would rather you dedicated your time to TT3 development than
anything else :-)
Yes, I'm expecting TT3's speed to increase, although in some cases we
might spend longer parsing in order to spend less time running. But
anyway, the language and runtime environments will be pluggable so that
you can use different implementations depending on what you're after:
speed, flexibility, safety, etc.
More comments to follow at the end of the thread...
A
_______________________________________________
templates mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.template-toolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/templates
