|We don't bite newbies here... much|
What about HTML::Template?This is one of those questions that I would give 10 upvotes to if I could. You would think that since I wrote this node giving high praise to HTML::Template that I would have looked at iit harder before embarking on my glory run with HTML::Seamstress
What happened is I read perrin's seminal article on template system comparisons and ran across on called HTML_Tree, which at the time was on CPAN. But he removed his module from CPAN so I wrote an equivalent which was an improvement over it (as I saw it) in a number of ways.
Now, I plan to drop my HTML::Seamstress project and join the HTML::Template camp... I guess I opted for the vi of template systems even though I use Perl and Emacs, which are the swiss-army chainsaws in their respective classes... heheh.
But for the record, seamstress could compile it's template to executable perl programs. Also, seamstress methods are closer tied to HTML::TreeBuilder and HTML::Element so that HTML manipulations were programmatic and structural as opposed to string-based.
Also, I intentionally left out an include statement, so that this would be forced on HomeSite, Dreamweaver, what have you.
But you just have to do things slightly different with HTML::Template. But I feel that HTML::Template does offer what Seamstress offers albeit with a slightly different API. But given it's maturity (my god, the caching features!) and popularity it is best to join that school and continue the war again Template and Mason et al.
In reply to Re: Re: rant on = qw(HTML::Mason Embperl Template etc) ;