Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
"be consistent"
 
PerlMonks  

Re: Website Conundrum...

by hippo (Bishop)
on Apr 04, 2017 at 08:17 UTC ( [id://1186967]=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Website Conundrum...

Some of the various attributes, pros and cons of the main Perl MVC frameworks were discussed here recently in UP-TO-DATE Comparison of CGI Alternatives. If you have a read through that it might help to sway you one way or another. If your main concern is the future support then I strongly recommend that you make as much of your code as possible to be framework-agnostic from the outset. This may impact a little on the whizziness but will add to the long-term robustness of the complete system. Nobody can say what the future holds: hope for the best, plan for the worst.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Website Conundrum...
by kel (Sexton) on Apr 04, 2017 at 17:23 UTC
    I feel like the pinball player in the Who song. Except I'm even missing a sense of smell.

    Or, in this case, *real* functioning templates like I have for a bunch of PHP sites. The problem with them of course is their *inflexibility*. OSCommerce is pretty well hardcoded in many areas that i would really want to change. Plus the fact that simply adding a page or a box can be a night's work.

    Basically what I am looking for is a swiss army cyber-knife. I am new to MVC and seeing a certain unexpected complexity to Rails, figured that if I am going to need to learn web frameworks (or whatever the more comprehensive term is) - that I would better learn the most (apparently) powerful - and then downgrade to the simpler. In short, I feel I need to learn something as complex as Catalyst (or even Mojo if it can equal its capabilities) - to be able to better use Jekyll ( for simpler sites).

    I have taken a contrary approach to learning OO - for which I have long had a mental block. I am learning Ruby OO, which I find intuitive - and that is suddenly making sense out of Perl's OO format.Perhaps even some day Java might make sense.

    Tke key aspect here is versatility, rather than simplicity. For simplicity I dont need to bother with MVC. I could just crank out a Drupal template, and toss some pics and text on it.

    I have the Catalyst book, so that may give me a leg up on what is traditionally poor documentation that has hobbled the Perl community. So much effort writing docs (Perl has the most extensive doc parsing of all) - but so little effort to make them comprehensible.

    If I can make a community website from the obfuscatory jibberish that consitutes the Drupal documentation, then I am not intimidated by Perl jibberish. At least its familiar to me.

    Community support is important. Vitally important actually in building *any* site. There are always snags not counted in google. So the question comes down to which is more 'lively' - Mojo or Catalyst these days. And if i must deal with Java/JS/Node - which platform would be the most flexible with it?

    Dancer is probably a good choice also, but the community seems smaller, and I do get the feeling that if I learn Catalyst, them Dancer development should be more easy to deal with. Of course I could be wrong!!!

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Domain Nodelet?
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://1186967]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this?Last hourOther CB clients
Other Users?
Others meditating upon the Monastery: (3)
As of 2024-03-29 01:30 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    No recent polls found