mason and embperl

jeffa has asked for the wisdom of the Perl Monks concerning the following question:

Hmmm, this is tricky so here goes . . .
I have a friend that is working for this company that makes web pages - right now, this company is using a concocted version of embedded perl by using eval in their web engine: perl code is used on the HTML pages (contained in delimiters) - the code is extracted from the page and 'eval'ed.

Personally, I think this is a BAD thing. I would like to suggest some changes for my friend and his/her company, maybe HTML::Mason or HTML::EmbPerl . . .

Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated, as I have not used either (but plan to real soon).

The hardest part will be to convince this company to give up their evil ways and see the light.
(insert holy-sounding chord here)

Jeff

Comment on mason and embperl

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: mason and embperl by JanneVee (Friar) on Sep 02, 2000 at 23:17 UTC
There are a number of Reasons to use Mason and EmbPerl. But the most important I can find. Security! And as I see the other benefits. Stability! The most important reason for a company to give up a eval:ing thing. Support! But these are just opinions! JanneVee	[reply]
(Ovid) RE(2): mason and embperl by Ovid (Cardinal) on Sep 03, 2000 at 02:20 UTC
JanneVee: considering your eloquent defense of COBOL in Perl: Survival of the Fittest, I surprised you didn't recommend COBOLScript. :) Cheers, Ovid	[reply]
(JanneVee) RE(3): mason and embperl by JanneVee (Friar) on Sep 03, 2000 at 04:13 UTC
I surprised you didn't recommend COBOLScript. My eloquent defense was based on the principle of what certain things are made for. COBOL -> heavy business processing. Perl -> process large amounts of information. This means that for HTML templating I think that Perl is better suited than COBOL for the particular task. Actually I don't like COBOL either, I just believe it has a place like FORTRAN. /JanneVee	[reply]
RE (tilly) something: mason and embperl by tilly (Archbishop) on Sep 03, 2000 at 04:26 UTC
Re: mason and embperl by merlyn (Sage) on Sep 02, 2000 at 23:15 UTC
There are so many good solutions in the CPAN, that a roll-your-own templating system doesn't make much sense any more. Personally, I'd look at HTML::Mason (which I'm using on `stonehenge.com`), or Template Toolkit, which I'm thinking about using in a big way. -- Randal L. Schwartz, Perl hacker	[reply]
Re: mason and embperl by gregorovius (Friar) on Sep 03, 2000 at 10:49 UTC
You should take a look at the What is the best tool to embed perl in HTML? node at the Q&A section for previous discussion on the matter.	[reply]
Re: mason and embperl by doran (Deacon) on Sep 03, 2000 at 05:29 UTC
You might also want to check out HTML::Template at CPAN.	[reply]
Re: mason and embperl by Maclir (Curate) on Sep 04, 2000 at 01:37 UTC
We are using EmbPerl here - in conjunction with mod_perl. It works well, there is adequate seperation between HTML and program logic, performance is good, and support is brilliant. I have looked briefly at Mason, and I believe long term this will be the way to go . . . just not ready to make the jump yet.	[reply]
Re: mason and embperl by geektron (Curate) on Sep 05, 2001 at 22:11 UTC
it's a little late in the replies, but there's also an article on perl.com on choosing a templating system. it's very close ( if not identical ) to the talk Mr. Harkin gave at TPC5. it goes through most of the major templating systems already on CPAN and gives some condensed info on each of them. might help with the decision.	[reply]


The stupid question is the question not asked
	PerlMonks

mason and embperl

:)