dancer web framework
Terrence Brannon
dancer.sukria.net/example> has not been discussed here previously.
It looks <http://github.com/sukria/Dancer/blob/master/lib/Dancer.pm>
heavier than Squatting but lighter than Mojo but very similar in
design to both.
One thing I dont like is the heavy preference it has for Template
Toolkit...
But it certainly is an interesting effort.
Personally, I remain with the pure OO approach to web dev - which
means CGI::Prototype is closed to how I operate.
beppu
on it when he visited la.pm a few years back, and ...I felt that his
understanding of the web development was a bit lacking at that point
in time. I asked him how redirects were done in CGI::Prototype, and
his answer back then was that he didn't use redirects. I was slightly
shocked by that answer.
--beppu
Terrence Brannon
yes, we've had this discussion on here before. You have a REST-ish style
where you take a POST of data and then redirect to the same url with a
GET to display the results of the post if successful.
I get along just fine in CGI::Prototype with object-oriented dispatch
instead of the redirect style.
The worst things about CGI::Prototype are:
1 - the docs: they dont motivate why he chose prototype based objects.
he speaks of it a bit in IRC channels, but has not written any articles
or anything showing how prototype objects provide advantages over
class-based ones in web-dev. And when I ask him to do so, I get
responses like this: http://perlmonks.org/?node_id=802257
2 - he wont allow a Moose-based update of CGIP into the distribution,
because Moose is class-based by default. I spent a good amount of time
writing such an upgrade
<http://github.com/metaperl/perl-module-cgi-prototype> and then found
out he wouldnt accept it. I really dont feel like creating a separate
distribution when the central controller of both is so similar.