in reply to Re: Re: Re: Code Critique
in thread Code Critique

I know that if separating code from content is an issue, then wouldn't it be simpler to move on to Mason? However, I'm not particular fan of this either since many Mason scripts I looked at appeared to be quite a mess.

With embeded Perl it is very easy to write HTML/Perl pages which look like a mess. It requires some self-dicpline to control use of Perl in templates. But it is possible to do it in right way (put business logic in modules, use Perl code in templates only to produce output, separate big sections of Perl and HTML). There exist quite good examples of HTML::Mason code: sources of www.masonhq.com, sources of Request Tracker.

--
Ilya Martynov (http://martynov.org/)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Embeded Perl
by Juerd (Abbot) on Dec 20, 2001 at 00:53 UTC
    My try was http://plp.juerd.nl/, as I didn't really like the existing alternatives. There'll be a new version soon.
    The thought behind it is quite simple: s/// the page into a CGI script and eval it ;) Works like a charm. 

    2;0 juerd@ouranos:~$ perl -e'undef christmas'
Segmentation fault
2;139 juerd@ouranos:~$

    [download]

[reply]
[d/l]
[reply]
        That question isn't in there because I don't know if it's "better" or not. It depends on your definition of "good" anyway.

        2;0 juerd@ouranos:~$ perl -e'undef christmas'
Segmentation fault
2;139 juerd@ouranos:~$

        [download]

[reply]
[d/l]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom