[Catalyst] Mason + DBI + Catalyst?

[J. Shirley]

On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 4:22 PM, Dave Rolsky <autarch at urth.org> wrote:

> On Mon, 25 May 2009, J. Shirley wrote:
>
>  Rather than Catalyst being geared towards TT, I would say Mason is geared
>> towards being a framework :)
>>
>
> Well, sort of. Mason is quite usable as a "pure" templating system. I use
> Mason with Catalyst for all my new projects, and the framework parts of
> Mason really don't matter to me.
>

Agreed, that's what I meant -- Mason has all the framework bits built in,
which means a lot of Mason developers don't see the appeal of Catalyst
(sadly).

I think the best statement about Mason and Catalyst is that if you want to
use View::Mason for the framework features, you are doing it wrong.  Agreed?

 (I think Dave is safely the resident expert here on Mason so his opinion
trumps certainly my own)


> Except you also lose really useful non-framework features like
> autohandlers, which are like TT's WRAPPER (but better, IMO).
>
>
Of course that would be your opinion! ;)

I actually thought MicroMason supported autohandlers (but not dhandlers) --
in that light, yes, just use Catalyst::View::Mason and disregard my
recommendation.  Sorry for the bad advice :)

Flogging accepted by first person wielding sufficiently stiff bamboo rod.

-J
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/pipermail/catalyst/attachments/20090525/56ab9=
73b/attachment.htm