Re: [htmltmpl] Including templates via parameter vs <tmpl_include>

[Josh C. <jos...@mi...>]

Interesting... Morphing templates! I hadn't considered using filters  
to change the variable names themselves. Thanks for the suggestion.

All best,
Josh

On Oct 21, 2005, at 3:29 PM, Mark A. Fuller wrote:

> From: Josh Clark <jos...@mi...>
>
>> I imagine this is somewhat more expensive than includes.
>>
> Significantly so? Particularly in a CGI environment? Other downsides?
>
> Something I like to do when I want to gain more reuse of template  
> fragments than feels comfortable with lots of includes is  
> preprocess the templates. (Or, if it seems like there's a lot of  
> one-time static setup of a page and I'm concerned about performance  
> issues.) For tags I want to preprocess I name them "<PREPROC_*>". I  
> have a little command line script to use H::T to load a template,  
> use the filter option to change all "<TMPL_*>" to some other value,  
> change "<PREPROC_*>" to <TMPL_*>, output the template, apply a  
> regular expression to change the original <TMPL_*> values back to  
> TMPL_*. I write the data to the real (run-time) template directory.
>
> Another way to get creative with includes is use multiple  
> directories on the template path option. You can use variable  
> substitution to include templates from different directories at run  
> time. But, it sounds to me like what you're trying to do would  
> benefit more from preprocessing?
>
> Mark
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by:
> Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads,  
> discussions,
> and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl
> _______________________________________________
> Html-template-users mailing list
> Htm...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/html-template-users
>