If Perl support inline scripting...

[howa]

e.g.

<?pl


echo "hello perl";

it would definitely become my choice of dynamic scripting language!

 

[Charlton Wilbur]

SP> Have a look at HTML::Mason or Template::Toolkit.

or ePerl (http://www.ossp.org/pkg/tool/eperl/), which is exactly what
the OP is asking for.

Charlton

 

[howa]

Have a look at HTML::Mason or Template::Toolkit.

sherm--

yes, i know about other library can do this.. but the main point is,
they are not offical Perl standard...

 

[Randal L. Schwartz]

howa> yes, i know about other library can do this.. but the main point is,
howa> they are not offical Perl standard...

They are in the CPAN. It doesn't get much better than that. If you mean
"part of the Perl core", then no, it's not in the initial Perl distro
download. Why is that important?

print "Just another Perl hacker,"; # the original

 

[howa]

Randal L. Schwartz ¼g¹D¡G

howa> yes, i know about other library can do this.. but the main point is,
howa> they are not offical Perl standard...

They are in the CPAN. It doesn't get much better than that. If you mean
"part of the Perl core", then no, it's not in the initial Perl distro
download. Why is that important?

print "Just another Perl hacker,"; # the original

--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
<[email protected]> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training!

well, i just thought that, if it is part-of-the-perl, then a lot of
people will consider using perl as the dynamic scripting language for
web page, rather than php, for example.

yes, i know that many perl hackers have a strong sense of
there-is-more-than-one-way-to-do-it, but standard is standard, people
think php is easy as <?php echo 'hello" ?> works. There is no need to
use CGI module, blah blah for example....

i just thought that this can be a future direction of perl...

 

[Charlton Wilbur]

h> well, i just thought that, if it is part-of-the-perl, then a
h> lot of people will consider using perl as the dynamic scripting
h> language for web page, rather than php, for example.

Mixing logic and presentation code in the way that PHP and ePerl
encourage is, frankly, stupid. It works well enough for small one-off
sites, but leads to poor architecture and poor maintainability.

h> people think php is easy as <?php echo 'hello" ?> works. There
h> is no need to use CGI module, blah blah for example....

Why do you think that altering Perl to make it more attractive to the
ignorant and lazy will be an improvement?

If you want PHP, you know where to find it.

Charlton

 

[xhoster]

Sherm Pendley wrote:

yes, i know about other library can do this.. but the main point is,
they are not offical Perl standard...

Is any of Perl "official Perl standard"?

Xho

 

[Tintin]

well, i just thought that, if it is part-of-the-perl, then a lot of
people will consider using perl as the dynamic scripting language for
web page, rather than php, for example.

yes, i know that many perl hackers have a strong sense of
there-is-more-than-one-way-to-do-it, but standard is standard, people
think php is easy as <?php echo 'hello" ?> works. There is no need to
use CGI module, blah blah for example....

But there is a need to install and configure PHP, which can sometimes get
very complicated and you run into dependancy nightmares when you try to get
all the various PHP modules and components talking to each other.

So if you look at it objectively, writing a dynamic web page with Mason or
similar, is no more complicated (and you could say a lot easier) than
setting up PHP and writing PHP pages.

 

[Andrew DeFaria]

h> well, i just thought that, if it is part-of-the-perl, then a
h> lot of people will consider using perl as the dynamic scripting
h> language for web page, rather than php, for example.

Mixing logic and presentation code in the way that PHP and ePerl
encourage is, frankly, stupid. It works well enough for small one-off
sites, but leads to poor architecture and poor maintainability.

Yeah like all of those PHP forums and apps like Jinzora. Those are all
totally useless...

h> people think php is easy as <?php echo 'hello" ?> works. There
h> is no need to use CGI module, blah blah for example....

Why do you think that altering Perl to make it more attractive to the
ignorant and lazy will be an improvement?

Huh? Do you even understand what he's asking for? How is it "attractive
to the ignorant and lazy" to want to have Perl easily available when
writing a web page?!? Oh sure you can use CGI but then everything has to
be handled by Perl. And no I've never seen a poorly architected and
poorly maintainable web page written with Perl and CGI - and neither
have you! Give me a frigging break...

 

[Justin C]

Yeah like all of those PHP forums and apps like Jinzora. Those are all
totally useless...

Charlton didn't say they were useless.

Huh? Do you even understand what he's asking for? How is it "attractive
to the ignorant and lazy" to want to have Perl easily available when
writing a web page?!? Oh sure you can use CGI but then everything has to
be handled by Perl.

It does? I think you've only seen web-servers that are poorly
configured. I have one here that runs perl and php scripts side by side
all day long. You're obviously mis-informed, but I don't know where I
should point you for the information you are lacking. Sorry.

And no I've never seen a poorly architected and
poorly maintainable web page written with Perl and CGI - and neither
have you! Give me a frigging break...

Your logic is seriously flawed. Charlton was saying that mixing
programming code and layout code leads to poor maintainability. It
doesn't follow that using perl instead means your site will be more
easily maintained; that requires skill. Poorly maintainable code can be
written in any language, it's just that, with a language like php, it's
almost inevitable.

 

[Charlton Wilbur]

AD> Yeah like all of those PHP forums and apps like Jinzora. Those
AD> are all totally useless...

Do you understand the difference between "poorly designed and
difficult to maintain" and "useless"?

My experience in PHP, what little I've done, is that once you hit a
certain size this thing that you consider a useful feature becomes a
liability, and the programmers wind up needing to enforce a separation
between logic and presentation themselves or the project becomes
unmaintainable. As I've said, it works well enough for small one-off
sites, but leads to poor architecture and maintainbility.

Hint: if you want to refute that, point out ways in which mixing logic
and presentation leads to good architecture and maintainability;
introducing things like "usefulness" that are irrelevant to the point
gets you nowhere.

AD> Huh? Do you even understand what he's asking for?

Yes, I do; as you may note, I pointed him to a project that does
*exactly* what he wants. Of course, he wasn't happy with that, as he
wants it to have some official imprimatur.

AD> How is it "attractive to the ignorant and lazy" to want to
AD> have Perl easily available when writing a web page?!?

It's not attractive to the ignorant and lazy to have Perl *available*;
it's attractive to the ignorant and lazy to have Perl easily
embeddable with PHP-like syntax. It's attractive to the ignorant,
because they don't yet realize how much pain they're in for if they
persist on that course; it's attractive to the lazy because for just a
bit more work they could have something like Text::Template or
HTML::Mason that gives them significant advantages over the
embedded-code approach.

Charlton

 

[John Bokma]

Charlton Wilbur wrote:
Yeah like all of those PHP forums and apps like Jinzora. Those are all
totally useless...

Ever tried to make your own templates for PHPbb, or modify an existing
one? And then tried to update?

Huh? Do you even understand what he's asking for? How is it "attractive
to the ignorant and lazy" to want to have Perl easily available when
writing a web page?!? Oh sure you can use CGI but then everything has to
be handled by Perl. And no I've never seen a poorly architected and
poorly maintainable web page written with Perl and CGI - and neither
have you! Give me a frigging break...

Yup, I have seen a lot of Perl CGI, and in the beginning I thought I had
seen the worse code in my life. Until I looked at PHP "programs". Just
read the user comments at php.net for several functions and you might get
my point (but this being Usenet, I guess not).

 

[Andrew DeFaria]

Charlton didn't say they were useless.

OK, those are all totally stupid.

It does? I think you've only seen web-servers that are poorly
configured. I have one here that runs perl and php scripts side by
side all day long. You're obviously mis-informed, but I don't know
where I should point you for the information you are lacking. Sorry.
Your logic is seriously flawed. Charlton was saying that mixing
programming code and layout code leads to poor maintainability.

I guess everybody's entitled to their own opinions, including myself. To
me, when writing a dynamic web page most of it is still static. Thus you
have to either write all of that static stuff out via Perl or you can do
it more like PHP where you write HTML then only write code for those
portions that need code.

It doesn't follow that using perl instead means your site will be more
easily maintained; that requires skill.

Oh so then you got my sarcastic point after all.

Poorly maintainable code can be written in any language, it's just
that, with a language like php, it's almost inevitable.

With that sir I respectfully disagree.

 

[Andrew DeFaria]

AD> Yeah like all of those PHP forums and apps like Jinzora. Those
AD> are all totally useless...

Do you understand the difference between "poorly designed and
difficult to maintain" and "useless"?

Yes. Do you understand the difference between stupid and useless?

My experience in PHP, what little I've done, is that once you hit a
certain size this thing that you consider a useful feature becomes a
liability, and the programmers wind up needing to enforce a separation
between logic and presentation themselves or the project becomes
unmaintainable. As I've said, it works well enough for small one-off
sites, but leads to poor architecture and maintainbility.

Which is why I pointed out such already written, well architected PHP
based applications like I did. These are not small, one-off
applications. Just because you can't write good applications in PHP (as
you already admit that you've only used it a little yet apparently feel
qualified enough to dismiss it - amazing) doesn't mean that it can't be
done. IOW perhaps it's just you!

Hint: if you want to refute that, point out ways in which mixing logic
and presentation leads to good architecture and maintainability;
introducing things like "usefulness" that are irrelevant to the point
gets you nowhere.

As I see it you haven't gotten anywhere to start with. You bemoan a
language you admit you don't really know or use. As such your statements
are suspect in my mind.

 

[Charlton Wilbur]

AD> As I see it you haven't gotten anywhere to start with. You
AD> bemoan a language you admit you don't really know or use. As
AD> such your statements are suspect in my mind.

One does not need to eat the whole egg to determine it is rotten.

Charlton