[Catalyst] Re: template comparison (was: why not mason

[A. Pagaltzis]

* Perrin Harkins <perrin at elem.com> [2006-10-28 06:05]:
> 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.

That makes a certain amount of sense; I say a certain amount,
because I’m not sure what case it makes for TT2:

1. Some bits of hairy display logic really are specific to the
   particular template they’re in, so putting them in a plugin
   just pointlessly moves apart related bits of code.
   
2. Sometimes there are still large blocks of static strings
   interspersed with such logic, so it’s more of a sub-template
   task than a plugin task.

3. If you’re going to bail out to the Perl layer for complex
   stuff (which you should), you might as well pick something
   with a more concise markup generation syntax than TT2’s for
   the simple stuff. (I admit TT2 fares decently when producing
   plain text formats – but I’ve never had to do that.)

Regards,
-- 
Aristotle Pagaltzis // <http://plasmasturm.org/>