Re: Package Proposal: HTML_Template_Dummy

Hi Paul, just two comments from me, as I am following this thread with interest. I am not able to vote +1 or -1 to include your class into PEAR because I am a quite long-time smarty user and do not really know the current state of the template engines available in PEAR so far. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul M Jones" <pjones@ciaweb.net> > Hi, Yavor, > > > I don't see the use of this class, it is too short to be usefull, > > anyone needing such functionality could come up with it in a matter of > > minutes. > > True enough ... but part of the point is not the functionality itself, > but the mindset (the method, if you will) that leads to using this kind > of class. This is definately interesting. If that is the case, a tutorial instead of a concrete implementation could be enough, where your code is provided as an example. Even if your package will not make it into PEAR, you could think about publishing an online-tutorial/article/whatever. > This class proposes a different mindset: go back to basics. Use PHP as > the template language. Let a cache class do your caching. Scrap the > whole "compiling" thing because that was just an outgrowth of the > ever-increasing complexity of your prior attempt at a template engine. > This class is not just about three main functions (or really just two) > -- it's about a way-of-doing-things. So maybe a better name would be HTML_Template_PHP ? ;) Does HTML as a top-level category fit here anyway? Best regards, Sebastian Roebke php@sebastian-r.de