I'm about 1/3 of the way through the Mason book and I'm looking for something to do to give the information soak time.
I'm itching to start working with Mason right away, but I know this is a bad plan. Need to give it a little time, go back a chapter and reread...I need a lot of mental logistics or else I go through a lot of mental gymnastics. I'm going to do something else, something explicitly unrelated to Mason, and then go back to the book before I start smashing components around and breaking stuff.
Today, that other thing is a programming project presented by ITA Software. It's concerning a palindrome containing all the letters of the alphabet. (And I would appreciate it greatly if anybody who finds this trivial would please not tell me how to solve it or what the word(s) is. Thank you.)
You might with to look at the differnences in your choices before proceding with Mason.
This kind of thing can mean the difference in your quality of life down the road.
Good Luck!
Re:Not to be a party pooper
jflowers on 2003-07-04T12:08:10
one more that may be more relavant
cmp template systemsRe:Not to be a party pooper
chaoticset on 2003-07-04T20:50:43
Consider my party unpooped. Friendly advice is always welcome. I would, however, like a little clarification.If you're implying that it's not wise to fall in love with a specific templating system, then consider that lesson taken -- I've already done work with HTML::Template, though it's not huge and advanced.
If you're implying that something about Mason is obviously inferior, I have yet to come across it, and would like to know about it as quickly as possible. Please let me know what it is, if this is the case.
And finally -- do you mean 'quality of life' as in the jobs and the money recieved for them, or 'quality of life' in the broader sense, that the code/templates I write/maintain will be easier to work with to a great degree?
If I'm completely off base here, please let me know that too.
:) Re:Not to be a party pooper
jflowers on 2003-07-06T00:52:41
I am a CGI::App user, but that is what works best for my needs, and they may not be the same as your's.
qq{The callback model can get a bit hairy when you have to code logic that can result in totally different content being returned. For example, if you have a system that processes some form input and takes the user to different pages depending on the data submitted. In these situations, it's easy to end up coding a spaghetti of includes and redirects, or putting what are really multiple pages in the same file.
... Keep in mind, many systems offer significant flexibility for customizing their execution models. For example, Mason users could write separate components for application logic and display, letting the logic components choose which display component to run after fetching their data. This allows it to be used in a pipeline style. ... HTML::Template and some of the AxKit XML processors are fairly rigid about insisting on a pipeline approach.} I need a pipeline model, and I like to use a tool that confines me to the model, HTML::Template, with in a framework, CGI::App, that lets me break free of the confines to meet absurd deadlines. This separation in tools clearly shows when and how I have broken the separation in presentation and control flow. I would prefer when I need to break the separation to place the presentation in the control flow. For me a separation in the tools used for presentation and control flow help.
So no I am not saying that any tool is inferior, I am saying make sure you are using the best tool for the job and that fits you.
When I say q{quality of life} I mean the latter q{in the broader sense, that the code/templates I write/maintain will be easier to work with to a great degree}
