On Wed, 2011-07-20 at 17:42 -0700, Vincent Catalano wrote: > What was the thought process behind using Chameleon as the default > templating language for Pyramid vs Mako which was used in Pylons?
There really was none, because there isn't a default templating language for Pyramid. Chameleon was the only templating language that shipped along with Pyramid's predecessor, repoze.bfg. All of the docs, the tutorials, and the scaffolds used it. The scaffolds use Chameleon because, well, you gotta use one. Chameleon was easy to pick for the scaffolds, since they were already written and working, and docs (the tutorials) depended on them. Pyramid depends on two templating languages (Mako and Chameleon) and you are free to use either; Pyramid has no opinion about it. For the scaffolding that has "Chameleon templates" in it, this is as easy as renaming "mytemplate.pt" to "mytemplate.mak" and making the appropriate change to the views that reference the template (they are compatible to the extent that the scaffolding uses them). You can also use pyramid_jinja2 to use jinja2 templates, etc. > Are there any major advantages or disadvantages to either one? Nope, purely a matter of taste. - C > > > --Vincent > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "pylons-discuss" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-discuss > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pylons-discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en.
