in reply to Lesson Four, Part 1 of online CGI course

Thanks, Ovid. Personally, I liked the old colors ;)

Question. You say:

I've heard many arguments regarding whether or not one should use CGI.pm's HTML generating functions. When building large, Web-based applications, they are innapropriate.
This makes sense to me - for a large (or even medium) application, the HTML generation will obscure the code. What's the preferred alternative? HTML::Template? CGI::Application? I've played with these a bit and read the docs, but haven't used either in production.

--
man with no legs, inc.
  • Comment on Re: Lesson Four, Part 1 of online CGI course

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
(Ovid) Re(2): Lesson Four, Part 1 of online CGI course
by Ovid (Cardinal) on Jun 19, 2001 at 21:17 UTC

    legLess asked:

    What's the preferred alternative [to embedded HTML or HTML shortcuts]?

    As one might expect, there is no preferred alternative. I use Template Toolkit at work. That, combined with stuffing most of my database work into objects has made my actual coding so ridiculously easy that it's not even funny. HTML::Template is a nice, lightweight templating system, but it's not as robust as the Toolkit. I've glanced at CGI::Application, but it basically appears to be a glorified substitution for if/then statements.

    Cheers,
    Ovid

    Join the Perlmonks Setiathome Group or just click on the the link and check out our stats.

[reply]

In Section Meditations