On Fri, 14 Feb 2003, Brett Sanger wrote: > Okay, now you've got me curious. I've never delved into the internals, > so correct me if any of my assumptions are wrong: > > 1) Both H::T and TT compile a template into perl code, and cache this > perl code to disk. Incorrect. HTML::Template compiles to a set of Perl data structures. People always tell me this means HTML::Template should be slow, which is pretty funny considering what the actual benchmarks have to say about that. HTML::Template::JIT compiles to native machine code. > 2) Both will cache code to memory, given the chance. Correct. Although, HTML::Template doesn't bother writing anything to disk unless you specifically ask for that (by using the file_cache). > Not really, since they both perform just fine :) I'm just trying to > increase my understanding of how they work now. Why not read the source? I'm sure you'll find they're more different than you imagine. Like Larry always says, there's more than one way to do it. Of course, some ways are faster than others. -sam --------------------------------------------------------------------- Web Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/suppressed/ To unsubscribe, e-mail: suppressed For additional commands, e-mail: suppressed
Mail converted by mhonarc 2.6.15
This archive provided courtesy of JSW4.NET, Internet Hosting Services for Small Business.