Re: [htmltmpl] RFC: Conditional TMPL_INCLUDE

[Sam T. <sa...@tr...>]

On Tue, 11 Jan 2005, Mathew Robertson wrote:

> I respect Sam's opinion on what should and shouldn't go into H::T,
> although I wouldn't consider some of the enhancements "feature
> creep" (ie I think not having TMPL_ELSIF would mean that a feature
> is missing) -> I thank him for producing a very use piece of code.

Thanks, I appreciate that.  I'm certainly not above changing my mind
if enough people see a need for a particular feature.  I'm definitely
thinking about doing something about variable TMPL_INCLUDEs, for
example.

> And these enhancements show that H::T can undergo more enhancements
> without 'breaking'... some of the features added to this version,
> are based on ideas from the people on this list -> they were added
> without a major re-architecture, more like a code evolution.

When I think about the dangers of feature creep I think about
global_vars.  It's a great feature which I've come to think of as the
way HTML::Template should have worked from the beginning.  It's also a
terrible hack which still doesn't work quite right and clutters the
code in a number of places.

> - I absolutely needed some bug fixes which Sam hasn't fixed

Can you refresh my memory about these?

> (note that most of these changes / enhancements cant be made by
> subclassing H::T...)

Which ones would you consider impossible?  I'm sure I could implement
TMPL_xxx extensions and TMPL_ELSIF in a sub-class.

-sam