you list only StringTemplate but not HTML::Template. Why?
I guess because HTML::Template::Expr
raises the entanglement index. But pure HTML::Template
is definitely push-style. Added.
Or put the question the other way round (assuming that Rhandom is right, that the point of your list, at least with the Perl part is "no mini-language")
When I opened this mode, I stated my purpose. It was to record push-style systems. I don't know why you would figure that Rhandom
would know more about my purposes than the ones I stated.
Why do you endorse/mention/include StringTemplate, though it has a mini-language?
Because it meets the criteria for strict separation... I'm starting to see that push-style is not what he used as a term. He did use pull-style when referring to tt/mason-esque systems, but he never used to the term pull style to refer to systems like XMLC, etc.