Re: [SMARTY-DEV] Var Templates
| From: | Andrei Zmievski | Date: | Wed, 16 Apr 2003 17:45:06 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: [SMARTY-DEV] Var Templates | ||
| References: | 1 2 | Groups: | php.smarty.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to php-smarty-dev+get-1199@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On Tue, 15 Apr 2003, boots wrote:
> Hi all.
>
> FWIW, I've been casually following the long discussion on backticks and
> automatically expanding vars as if they were themselves templates. I
> think it was Tom Sommer who initiated that discussion, but if not, he
> certainly has put a lot of interesting details on the table.
>
> One thing I am uncertain of is the need for such a thing in the base
> Smarty engine. From Monte Ohrt's comments, it looks like this type of
> change has potential to wreak havoc with performance and in the end,
> I'm not sure why anyone would REALLY need this feature--at least in the
> engine core. There are two issues I'm concerned about:
>
> 1) there seems to be a push to program general COMPUTATION using the
> template facility instead of PHP code. I'm -1 on that because I think
> that as much as possible, logic should be handled in the PHP code.
> Otherwise your templates aren't really templates, are they? In other
> words, if you want to evaluate a var using templates and then use that
> value in another template, you should probably do the first evaluation
> in PHP and pass the results to the second template. Both your code and
> your templates are likely to be a bit more stable in that case.
>
> 2) I want the base Smarty to stay as minimally small (and fast!) as
> possible. IMHO, anything that can be implemented effeciently using the
> Smarty API (ie. plugins, resources, filters) should be factored out of
> the engine.
>
> For example, the functionality that Tom is talking about can likely be
> created using a custom Resource. I posted a very simple Global Var
> template reader to the Wiki back in september that shows how to go
> about doing a similar thing (it would have to be expanded to meet Tom's
> criteria). The point is, is that there is a LOT of room to extend
> functionality without trying to shoehorn everything into the core. This
> is especially true for the more abstract and escoteric features that we
> developers sometimes crave :).
Amen. That has been my view for a long time too.
-Andrei http://www.gravitonic.com/
What's hard, in hacking as in fiction,
is not the writing, it's deciding what to write.
-- Neal Stephenson