Re: Re: smarty
| From: | Chris de Vidal | Date: | Wed, 14 Apr 2004 16:11:31 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Re: smarty | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 | Groups: | php.general |
| Request: | Send a blank email to php-general+get-183342@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Enrico Weigelt said:
> I really don't like smarty. The idea is simply not right.
It's a good idea; in fact, PHP was originally supposed to be a templating
engine. You can easily separate business and presentation logic in either
PHP or Smarty.
> + does not separate (imperative) code from layout. it still models
> process logic
To a limited extent.
> + such non-trivial imperative code is not suited for non-programmer's
> (perhaps graphical) editing tools.
My goal is to allow my Front Page (yuck, don't have a choice) developer to
mock up an entire site and then I'll plug in PHP or Smarty template code.
Works well. Or I can supply an extremely sparse HTML file with PHP/Smarty
template code in it and she can mock it up.
> + the layouter has still so learn (a subset of) php and so also has
> to be a programmer
See above...
> + offers no clear borderline between layout definitions and application
> code.
> you simply can't give a customer of your application service access to
> without imposing really serious security problems.
A valid concern.
> + bound to the php-interpreter and cannot be used w/ other languages.
> + content rendering process cannot be separated from the application
> server.
Another valid concern.
Hey PHP/Smarty templates aren't for everyone. No one said they were. But
for my next project I believe I'll be using native PHP as a template
engine.
/dev/idal