Re: Pear HTML_Template vs Smarty

I dont understand , what did u mean its trivial to add using bufferedOutputObject ? Thats returned the buffered string, as you said the application level should be able to handle the caching, ie using cache lite its advised from the examples to cache everything and only include the required classes on the non cached page. And then you have caching extensions which can be cached page per page wise, so personally I dont think a template engine should really have to handle the output caching or its just one extra included feature in there that may make it more bulky. However what is the compiler caching you talking about ? On 07/03/2006, at 3:27 PM, Alan Knowles wrote:

For flexy, It's pretty trivial to add using bufferedOutputObject(), what Flexy doesnt try and do is understand how you might need to cache that output... -> which is really very dependant on the application... ** caching here refers to output caching, not compile caching... (for those that wondered..) Regards Alan Dan Rossi wrote:

On 07/03/2006, at 12:17 PM, Justin Patrin wrote:

It should also be mentioned that some template engines (e.g. Smarty) will compile and cache templates as well.

Which can happen application level or server level anyway , but a cache feature would be handy in flexy but then again, extra code to be added into it.

-- PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php