Re: [PHP Template] Opinion on PHP Template Engine spec revision 0.52

On Tue, 21 Mar 2000, jm wrote: > The smart stuff is in the php code. > > What basically the template needs to have is: > + variable > + "loop" (which lacks in the perl fasttemplate and has been incorporated > in the php version) > + speed (so maybe some kind of caching mecanism is needed) > > > No need for "smart" stuffs like conditional or any preprocessor like > instruction. > that can be done in php if dynamic is needed, > or with some preprocessor if the logic has to be done once. > > I'd like the template engine to be kept simple, > so web designer (some who never WROTE html, just use cool tools > like dreamweaver or worse ones like xxx ) can understand and write templates. > I don't need them to write the logic. The logic is on the php side. > HTML has no logic. WebDesigners don't need to design "logic". > > > Basically, I don't want SMART templates, > I want a simple and standard template engine, so everyone coding php will > start to use it. > That is what my work experience showed me. Nothing in the current template engine prevents you from using variable/loop combination. Nothing forces you to go beyond that. I simply don't understand why you people object to _optional_ features that may come in handy some day. Or maybe you should use FastTemplate. > Now, may be I'm dumb and I need enlightement, > so what exactly is the advantage of SMART templates, > instead of simple templates and smart PHP code ?? > Concretely I mean. Real world example I mean. Localization. There's your real world example. -Andrei "Computers are useless. They can only give you answers." --Pablo Picasso