[Catalyst] catalyst++
Garrett Goebel
ggoebel at goebel.ws
Fri Sep 29 17:41:23 CEST 2006
On Sep 29, 2006, at 8:39 AM, Jonathan Rockway wrote:
>> When I looked at InstantCrud, it only worked with TT, and I want to
>> use it with Mason. Is there a way to do this?
>
> Welcome to the world of software. :) If you want flexibility, you're
> going to have to code it yourself. If you want ready-to-go magic,
> you're going to have to compromise somewhere.
I think Zbigniew Lukasiak has recently mentioned plans to modularize
forms generation. You might want to contact and work with him on
providing the capability to generate alternate Mason views.
> Also, Jifty probably does exactly what you want (Lots of magic,
> lots of
> mason). Unfortunately it's a bit too clever for its own good --
> syntax
> like:
>
> use MyWeblog::Record schema {
>
> column title =>
> type is 'text',
> label is 'Title',
> default is 'Untitled post';
>
> column body =>
> type is 'text',
> label is 'Content',
> render_as 'Textarea';
> }
>
> has to be confusing to people who are new to perl. (Why he couldn't
> have just done
Personally I wouldn't mind seeing schema's declared using the syntax
supported by Object::Declare. However you want to do it, declarative
programming in general is a good thing. Last time I looked at the
Object::Declare code though, you couldn't declare nested objects.
But isn't this a case of the pot calling the kettle black? I have to
agree that the Jifty people tend to spend a lot of time writing
clever code so that perl code won't look like perl. But that hasn't
stopped people in the Catalyst community from advocating YAML.
> Finally, I do have some ideas brewing in my mind about how to add more
> Jifty-like magic on top of Catalyst... but I'm waiting to see how
> Reaction pans out :)
A link to Reaction please? http://search.cpan.org/dist/Reaction/
Looks interesting, but it hasn't been updated since May...
How about some more specific ideas of what you'd like to see?
I would like to see a cohesive set of modules demonstrating best
practices that'd make it easier to assemble a web application. Jifty
seems philosophy seems to be TOTW, whereas Catalyst's is TIMTOWTDI.
And making a framework where TIMTOWTDI is a heck of a lot harder.
Specifically, I'd like to see some:
o generic facility for input and output filtering for forms and
RESTful web api's
o multi-attribute dispatch routing
o group ACL with groups that can contain groups
o forms interface with support for xforms and nested forms
o view widgets
I'm still learning a lot. The tutorial is an excellent start. But
it'd be a lot easier to come up to speed on things if there were some
well-documented demo applications more complicated than a blog. I.e.
something that exercised the functionality that so many of the FAQ's
are about: File uploads, progress meters, dbic, etc. Perhaps I'll try
to do a better job documenting my work on a chess club app and
release that whenever I get it 90% done.
cheers,
Garrett
More information about the Catalyst
mailing list