Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
P is for Practical
 
PerlMonks  

Catalyst vs Jifty

by jarich (Curate)
on Aug 19, 2008 at 01:13 UTC ( #705110=perlquestion: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??
jarich has asked for the wisdom of the Perl Monks concerning the following question:

About a month ago I was looking for a good article which summarises the differences between the various Perl MVCs. I asked a few people who'd know about such things better than I, and they told me with certainty that it doesn't exist. I asked Google, and it didn't seem to know either.

So anyway, since I figured I had to find out this information anyway; I decided I'd learn both of them and put together a conference paper and talk on the topic as well. Still I have my concerns about being able to to learn both of them well enough to do them justice before September 15th. So I'm asking the experts as well...

If you are a regular user of either of these systems; have experience with both; or would just like to air your opinion regardless; please feel free to comment! If you want to comment about CGI::App, Maypole, Gantry or any of the other similar options as well your opinions are also welcome (because I'd like to mention those too!)

Thanks.

PS: The comparison at wikipedia doesn't count (it doesn't cover Jifty). However if you'd like to update the page so that it does; that'd help me too. ;)

Comment on Catalyst vs Jifty
Re: Catalyst vs Jifty
by dragonchild (Archbishop) on Aug 19, 2008 at 03:04 UTC
    You want to talk with mst for Catalyst (as the lead dev) and for general knowledge. audreyt is a primary author of Jifty along with Jesse Vincent. Jesse Erlbaum is the lead dev for Cgiapp, but Mark Stosberg does a lot of the release work. Every one of them has been very easy to approach.

    Personally, I've used Cgiapp and Catalyst. I've written quite a bit on Cgiapp on this site which you can find - a lot is from at least 3 years ago when I was using it more actively and contributed to it (some of the error-handling).

    For my sense, Cgiapp is better for smaller sites - it has less of a learning curve and is easier to deploy. Catalyst is much more heavy duty - it takes a bit more learning and requires thinking more in Cat-terms. But, it scales extremely well, has great support, and interfaces with a ton of different modules out of the box or though an extensive plugin system. All the frameworks have a plugin system, but Cat's is built into the entire framework vs. being an afterthough as Cgiapp's was.


    My criteria for good software:
    1. Does it work?
    2. Can someone else come in, make a change, and be reasonably certain no bugs were introduced?
Re: Catalyst vs Jifty
by perrin (Chancellor) on Aug 19, 2008 at 16:48 UTC
    I gave a presentation comparing MVC frameworks a few years ago. You can read the slides and look at the code samples. However, these do not include Jifty.

    In general, the difference you'll notice between Jifty and Catalyst is that Jifty has a defined set of tools and way of doing things while Catalyst tries to more hands-off. If you want a more integrated framework that gives you more guidance on how to do things, Jifty might be a good choice. If you already have tools you want to use (a templating tool, an ORM, a form validator), you will probably prefer Catalyst.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: perlquestion [id://705110]
Approved by GrandFather
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others drinking their drinks and smoking their pipes about the Monastery: (14)
As of 2014-12-22 17:44 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    Is guessing a good strategy for surviving in the IT business?





    Results (126 votes), past polls