David Cantrell wrote: > Let me clear up a few things here. I wrote my toy system because I had an > itch which needed scratching. I looked at pre-existing alternatives and > rejected them all for various reasons. The only reason I'm even bothering > to argue about this is because of the incorrect assertions coming from > people who really should know better that my sort of solution inevitably > leads to spaghetti code ...
So everyone else thinks that templating systems are a good idea. So do you, but yours is smaller. Much discussion ensues - probably boundless - about exactly what the template system should, or shouldn't be able to do... Your lightweight system is neither obvious, nor what any nonidiot would do, nor necessarily trivial in any other nonCOBOL, nonAssembler language, and therefore implicitly suggests Perl (or similar) and a templating scheme rather like yours. And is not what everyone else was saying would cause spaghetti code. You could mount similar arguments on virtually anything. Get rid of $W==1 or strict, and you (and any other nonidiot) will do the right thing anyway. Sure. Get rid of RDBMSs, and just store your data in delimited, table-like files! It'll work. Doesn't *have* to lead to spaghetti... Cheers Ti'
