On Thu, Nov 09, 2006 at 08:47:37AM +, Ian Docherty wrote:
> >I agree. I'm a week (part time) into building my application with
> >Cayalyst, and I'm still not anywhere near the functionality I had
> >with Maypole after a day of hacking. This isn't because maypole
> >is more powerful or anythin
Josef Karthauser wrote:
On Wed, Nov 08, 2006 at 10:29:11PM +0100, Zbigniew Lukasiak wrote:
...
I agree. I'm a week (part time) into building my application with
Cayalyst, and I'm still not anywhere near the functionality I had
with Maypole after a day of hacking. This isn't because maypole
marcus baker wrote:
In a primarily Perl shop I've joined, Django has become all the rage.
Everyone into it is amazed at the templating capabilities and the
database abstraction layer (...they obviously hadn't really done much
with the Template Toolkit, or even heard of Class::DBI or
DBIx::Class).
On Wed, Nov 08, 2006 at 09:41:56PM +, Josef Karthauser wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 08, 2006 at 12:13:53PM -0800, Bill Moseley wrote:
> > Well, in my case currently this is all I'd need to do:
> >
> > [% # Template to generate a standard form
> >
> > WRAPPER form_wrapper;
> >
On Wed, Nov 08, 2006 at 10:29:11PM +0100, Zbigniew Lukasiak wrote:
> Answering the question about autogenerating simple CRUD apps - there
> is of course Catalyst::Example::InstantCRUD.
>
> To the arguments that autogenerated CRUD becomes quickly crap I answer
> that it is much easier to modify a w
On Wed, Nov 08, 2006 at 12:13:53PM -0800, Bill Moseley wrote:
> Well, in my case currently this is all I'd need to do:
>
> [% # Template to generate a standard form
>
> WRAPPER form_wrapper;
> FOR f = form.fields;
> field(form, f );
> END;
>
Answering the question about autogenerating simple CRUD apps - there
is of course Catalyst::Example::InstantCRUD.
To the arguments that autogenerated CRUD becomes quickly crap I answer
that it is much easier to modify a working example than to code from
scratch. You have more control of where yo
On Wed, Nov 08, 2006 at 02:46:02PM -0500, marcus baker wrote:
> Having this capability might do well to entice more novice developers
> to Catalyst due to this next step in ease of use and getting a quick
> app running... It seemed to do well for the Rails camp. Hopefully
> from there people would
"I think you will amot always find that you need to have more control
than any automated form generation will be able to give you."
Not necessarily. I mean for an extensible "real world" web app I
agree, I'd much rather develop these kinds of things with the separate
pertinent and effective tool
Ian Docherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 11/08/2006 12:35:04 PM:
> marcus baker wrote:
> > In a primarily Perl shop I've joined, Django has become all the rage.
> > Everyone into it is amazed at the templating capabilities and the
> > database abstraction layer (...they obviously hadn't rea
On Wed, Nov 08, 2006 at 12:28:48PM -0500, marcus baker wrote:
> The one thing about Django that keeps them from looking anywhere else
> is it's ability to create data-editing forms on the fly based on the
> data model. In an attempt to get them to consider Catalyst a little
> more, I was wondering
marcus baker wrote:
In a primarily Perl shop I've joined, Django has become all the rage.
Everyone into it is amazed at the templating capabilities and the
database abstraction layer (...they obviously hadn't really done much
with the Template Toolkit, or even heard of Class::DBI or
DBIx::Class).
A lot of people seem to be using HTML::Widget for forms these days, but
as far as I'm aware no module currently exists that will generate
HTML::Widget forms from the model automatically.
Probably
http://search.cpan.org/~jrobinson/DBIx-Class-WebForm/lib/DBIx/Class/WebForm.pm
is more along the
In a primarily Perl shop I've joined, Django has become all the rage.
Everyone into it is amazed at the templating capabilities and the
database abstraction layer (...they obviously hadn't really done much
with the Template Toolkit, or even heard of Class::DBI or
DBIx::Class). Django's all fine a
14 matches
Mail list logo
