in reply to RE: RE: Text::Template
in thread Text::Template
In short, since I just had this discussion yesterday:
- TT is language-agnostic, and works well even in languages where whitespace matters.
- TT provides heavy customization callbacks at each level of processing
- TT has an embedded language that hides the difference between hashes and method calls so dumb hashes can be turned into smart objects later
- TT plays well outside mod_perl as a static transformation tool (or even in CGI)
- Mason has better "out of the box" caching, but TT has all the right hooks to write your own easily, probably better for real applications anyway
- TT permits Embedded Perl to be turned off or on for a given input source, useful in an enviroment where full Perl interface would be dangerous or misleading
- embedded TT triggers can be changed to suit the parsed language, and for HTML be selected so as to get into and out of WYSIWYG HTML wranglers without mangling
- One customer site I know doing $30M a year is using it and recommended it highly over the other embedded Perl/HTML solutions after doing their own study
-- Randal L. Schwartz, Perl hacker
|
---|
Replies are listed 'Best First'. | |
---|---|
RE: Template Toolkit vs HTML::Mason
by princepawn (Parson) on Oct 23, 2000 at 16:50 UTC |
In Section
Module Reviews