Re: Re: HTML::Mason

It'll work in CGI mode, but more expensively.

<obligatory_plug kind="Template">Of course, there's always Template, which works very flexibly.</obligatory_plug>

Comment on Re: Re: HTML::Mason

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Re: HTML::Mason by princepawn (Parson) on Mar 03, 2001 at 03:04 UTC
Template actually has 2 web app frameworks built on it: Open Interact and Iajutsu. But you can see my home node (princepawn) and see that there are many frameworks for Perl, but no objective evaluation of them all... AgentM has had good success with CGI::Application. I personally am impressed with BingoX because all you have to do is create the database and it can generate the content entry tables for you. I dont think it's database interface BingoX::Carbon is as nice as DBIx::Recordset, but it's a nice application-level API. Would evaluating all these web app frameworks be a useful topic for a book? Would it sell?	[reply]
Re^4: HTML::Mason by Anonymous Monk on Nov 19, 2004 at 19:55 UTC
Question: which of the app frameworks on your home node page comes closest in design to "Fusebox"? I rad through several of their POD pages but wasn't able to determine a similar "fuse" framework.	[reply]