Re: template engine...why???

"Rasmus Lerdorf" <rasmus@lerdorf.com> wrote in message news:Pine.WNT.4.53.0304300801440.728@DELL... > The only templating systems I can honestly say are complementary are the > ones that pre-generate pages so there is absolutely no run-time hit from > the templating system. Anything that parses template files and by > whatever means does search and replace stuff at runtime is just inherently > nasty if you care about performance at all. Honestly, while TT does generate code (which still uses str_replace), I believe what you are saying is concetrating on optimizing a wrong spot of code. Also statement that compiling into PHP is automatically so much faster than string replace is also questionable. PHP is not executed on the bare metal, but interpreted, and something is parsing that php code, or at least swifting through the intermediate representation generated by the php optimizer. My experience is that real bottlenecks are elsewhere, and they are usually order of magnitude larger. Some of them can be avoided by rearanging how the application works , some by brute force, and some can not be avoided since they are inherent to web application model. I have been using TT on reasonably sized sites (not the huge ones like yahoo, dmoz or cnn, but not the peanuts either, something in 50-100k pages/day range), and I have not found performance reasons to avoid templates. If I were to produce a huge site, I believe I would be still using the same approach, and concetrate on modeling the logic of application, and seek how to reduce the number of times samething is done, and how to divide the work between the machines. rush -- http://www.templatetamer.com/