From: <jo...@cy...> - 2004-12-30 05:52:19
|
I would also recommend keeping the templates separate, I generally user servlets and have them call my templates and display their output. If the cheetah pages were accessed directly (like psp pages) then I would be loosing alot of the functionality of the template. Jose > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Re: [Webware-discuss] Experience to share: using WebWare, > DocumentTemplate , HTMLGrid > From: "Ian Bicking" <ia...@co...> > Date: Wed, December 29, 2004 10:41 am > To: "Winston WOLFF" <win...@ca...> > Cc: "<web...@th...>" > <web...@th...>, > "<web...@li...> > <web...@li...> > <web...@li...> > <web...@li...>" > <web...@li...> > > Winston WOLFF wrote: > > Thanks for the perspective. Like you, I found Webware after examining > > Zope, and I found Zope too overwhelming. I wanted something simpler and > > smaller. > > > > Regarding DocumentTemplate, that's an interesting alternative. I'll have > > to look into that. I've been switching a lot between Cheetah and PSP and > > I'm not satisfied with either. Cheetah almost works for me, but I keep > > running into one problem--I can't run callMethodOfServlet() on it. It > > does some tricky things to inherit from Servlet and messes us things > > inside the transaction object which causes a failure. > > I'd recommend not using Cheetah templates as servlets -- it's better to > have the template separate, and have the servlet call the template. > > I'd also discourage using DocumentTemplate -- it's really a dead-end, > and is being actively replaced by Zope Page Templates in Zope. > Personally I've grown to hate DTML in the Zope context; I'd never > actually realized you could use them outside of Zope, but then I've > never had any desire. And though DTML is faster than ZPT, it's likely > to be slower than Cheetah or PSP (which are compiled to Python, where > DTML is interpreted). ZPT is definitely slower than them all. > > ZPT is also available separate from Zope, and I've used them a great > deal with Webware, quite successfully I think. > > -- > Ian Bicking / ia...@co... / http://blog.ianbicking.org > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide > Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. > Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. > http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/ > _______________________________________________ > Webware-discuss mailing list > Web...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/webware-discuss |
From: Mark P. <ma...@mo...> - 2004-12-30 16:04:14
|
On Dec 30, 2004, at 2:57 AM, <web...@th...> wrote: > Please allow me to remain stubborn in my support of DTML : I have > developed, > with my team, multiple web apps using DTML and yes, every > language/technology has its pros and cons, but talk of "the mess that > is > DTML" just isn't coherent (at all) with our experiences ... I appreciate your position. You have been successful with this technology, so why would anyone knock it? The difference may be approached with the question of "what is a programming language?". This may seem fundamental but there is, imho, a tendency to consider templates and such as programming languages when they merely script. That is to say they are simply the structured data used by the underlying programming language. To some, there is no "language" in programming at all. To others this or that isn't a "programming language" if you cannot compile it to machine code. Beyond that, in the 4GL region of the universe, there are a multitude of things that look a lot like programming "languages". In this context, DTML may be seen as more complicated that it needs to be. And there is the notion that building a "framework" upon a framework is redundant. More to the point, the elegance of a solution lies in the efficiency of the framework, the velocity a team can attain and the resilience of the architecture to the inevitable change in requirements. In the end, and as far as end users are concerned, if it works I am a hero. If it doesn't I am a goat. Happy new year, Mark Phillips |
From: <web...@th...> - 2004-12-30 16:35:27
|
Hi, > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- > Van: Mark Phillips [mailto:ma...@mo...] > Verzonden: donderdag 30 december 2004 17:02 <snap> > The difference may be approached with the question of "what > is a programming language?". This may seem fundamental but > there is, imho, a tendency to consider templates and such as > programming languages when they merely script. <snap> > In this context, DTML may be seen as more complicated that it > needs to be. And there is the notion that building a > "framework" upon a framework is redundant. This is a very interesting point you make, very familiar to our experience with (and many internal discussions on how to apply!) DTML. We now try to avoid the more complex features if their implementation in python doesn't result in hard coded HTML fragment strings : in our opinion / taste , all data processing belongs in the python code if possible, and result data should be passed to DTML in an 'optimally elegant', i.e. fully normalized, data structure. > More to the point, > the elegance of a solution lies in the efficiency of the > framework, the velocity a team can attain and the resilience > of the architecture to the inevitable change in requirements. Hear hear, and a happy new year to you too ! -- Thijs Phaedro |