Re: [cgiapp] load_tmpl() question.

[Stephen Howard <suppressed>]

petersm wrote:


> I disagree. I think that by adding new methods to C::A you just clutter it up.
> We could end up with hundreds of new methods that just act as interfaces to
> different contructors/methods of other commonly used modules (T::T,
> CGI::Session, D::FV, etc). I find that 'explicit invocation of external
> modules' makes the code very easy to follow since you know exactly where to
> look for documentation about what is happening. Instead, if C::A implements a
> interface (which would add one more method call to your object creation
> costing you .00000001 sec) to another object, then the C::A docs would try and
> explain things that that particular modules documentation explains.

I actually don't feel that making a routine polymorphic adds discernable 
bloat.  Then again, I'm a TT guy, and don't use load_tmpl

> Instead of this, I think we should resume the discussion we had a few months
> back about including some sort of plugin/registry/cleanup functionality to
> C::A. Then when someone else requests this same kind of feature (just an
> interface to another module) it can be implemented in it's own C::A::Plugin
> style and not clutter up C::A itself.

I'm afraid my own efforts on this got a bit derailed with my late 
shipment of Tuits.  The code for Application::Pipeline is in pretty good 
shape though, and I hope to get back to getting it into CPAN shortly.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Web Archive:  http://www.mail-archive.com/suppressed/
             http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=cgiapp&r=1&w=2
To unsubscribe, e-mail: suppressed
For additional commands, e-mail: suppressed