Re^2: Petal is pull-style... like TT/mason - Seamstress is push-style

[stiller]

Actually, your synopsis is good.
I hate it when people does this; make me think. I think too much already. I'm not good at that.

*sigh*
How many times have I discovered that I've cut corners with TT, in the rush to implement / fix some borken functionality, brought more logic into the templates than I meant. It always sneaks in, because it's possible and convenient.

I've read your synopsis, quickstart and what has been written here so far today, and I will give your HTML::Seamstress a spin the next week.

[metaperl]

Actually, your synopsis is good.

I tend to think that people want to see code in a synopsis not a long-winded discussion. I moved that discussion way down and put some code samples in the synopsis for the 5.0a version I just uploaded

How many times have I discovered that I've cut corners with TT, in the rush to implement / fix some borken functionality, brought more logic into the templates than I meant. It always sneaks in, because it's possible and convenient.

hehe. I can imagine. And then the spaghetti gets deeper and deeper. i've had mason code like that. I simply cant think in terms of tt/mason anymore.

I've read your synopsis, quickstart and what has been written here so far today, and I will give your HTML::Seamstress a spin the next week.

I'm glad to hear that. There is a mailing list on sourceforge. I'm pretty response to messages. Overall, the whole Seamstress project needs thorough documenting. That's one thing about tt - the documentation is simply staggering.

If Seamstress trips you up somewhere or is not as approachable as you would like, just hit me up here or on the mailing list and will clean things up.