On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 03:23:29PM +0300, Octavian Rasnita wrote:
Ok, I will correct it (because I remember at least an error in it), test it
and put it in a wiki.
Can anyone recommend a good place for a thing like this?
I'm not really very sure. How about a page linked off the 'faq' under
Octavian Râsnita ha scritto:
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 01:37:40AM +0200, Daniel Carrera wrote:
Being able to chain resultsets makes it much much easier than using
straight SQL, and you write less code. If you have a query you've
constructed called $query, and lets say you now only want active
From: Marcello Romani mrom...@ottotecnica.com Octavian Râsnita ha
scritto:
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 01:37:40AM +0200, Daniel Carrera wrote:
Being able to chain resultsets makes it much much easier than using
straight SQL, and you write less code. If you have a query you've
constructed called
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 01:14:18AM +0200, Daniel Carrera wrote:
I hesitate to make predictions like this. I don't know DBIC, and you
don't know my queries. I know that I find SQL no harder than Perl, and
that I appreciate being able to experiment with queries with phpMyAdmin.
So I can't
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 01:37:40AM +0200, Daniel Carrera wrote:
Do you write your queries using straight SQL? For my application, MySQL
is a bottleneck. So it is important to me that I have control over the
queries to try to make them efficient. I don't have any query that spans
8 tables
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 01:37:40AM +0200, Daniel Carrera wrote:
Being able to chain resultsets makes it much much easier than using
straight SQL, and you write less code. If you have a query you've
constructed called $query, and lets say you now only want active records
you can do $query =
Hello,
I'm starting to learn about Catalyst. I'm looking for a MVC framework
for Perl. My first concern is that for views, Catalyst seems to be
really geared toward TemplateToolkit and I don't really like TT. I think
I like Mason (no real experience though). I know that Catalyst can work
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 12:35:45AM +0200, Daniel Carrera wrote:
Is there any good documentation for Catalyst that is based on Mason?
http://search.cpan.org/~flora/Catalyst-View-Mason-0.17/lib/Catalyst/View/Mason.pm
Any suggestions?
Nothing's stopping you from just using DBI.
On Monday 25 May 2009 05:35:45 pm Daniel Carrera wrote:
Is there any good documentation for Catalyst that is based on Mason?
Catalyst is Perl. Catalyst apps are Perl apps. All the docs you need on Mason
are in perldoc Mason and all the docs you need on DBI are in perldoc DBI. The
info you need
On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 3:35 PM, Daniel Carrera
daniel.carr...@theingots.org wrote:
Hello,
I'm starting to learn about Catalyst. I'm looking for a MVC framework for
Perl. My first concern is that for views, Catalyst seems to be really geared
toward TemplateToolkit and I don't really like
On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 04:00:38PM -0700, J. Shirley wrote:
The view should just be thin templates, in that regard I would
recommend using Catalyst::View::MicroMason
(http://search.cpan.org/~jrockway/Catalyst-View-MicroMason-0.05/lib/
Catalyst/View/MicroMason.pm) which wraps
Andrew Rodland wrote:
The
info you need on how things get glued together is in perldoc
Catalyst::View::Mason and perldoc Catalyst::Model::DBI.
I didn't know about Catalyst::View::Mason, thanks. Btw, this is related
to the point of my post, it is hard to RTFM if you don't know where the
FM
On Mon, 25 May 2009, J. Shirley wrote:
Rather than Catalyst being geared towards TT, I would say Mason is geared
towards being a framework :)
Well, sort of. Mason is quite usable as a pure templating system. I use
Mason with Catalyst for all my new projects, and the framework parts of
Mason
Daniel Carrera wrote:
Andrew Rodland wrote:
The info you need on how things get glued together is in perldoc
Catalyst::View::Mason and perldoc Catalyst::Model::DBI.
I didn't know about Catalyst::View::Mason, thanks. Btw, this is related
to the point of my post, it is hard to RTFM if you
Hans Dieter Pearcey wrote:
Ew. If the OP is used to non-trivial Mason -- autohandlers, subcomponents,
methods, etc., all things that are reasonable as part of a templating engine
(i.e. not web framework-related) -- MicroMason isn't really going to be
satisfactory.
Hmm... While I'm not used
On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 4:22 PM, Dave Rolsky auta...@urth.org wrote:
On Mon, 25 May 2009, J. Shirley wrote:
Rather than Catalyst being geared towards TT, I would say Mason is geared
towards being a framework :)
Well, sort of. Mason is quite usable as a pure templating system. I use
Mason
Do you write your queries using straight SQL? For my application, MySQL is
a bottleneck. So it is important to me that I have control over the queries
to try to make them efficient. I don't have any query that spans 8 tables
though. So if you are happy with DBIC, then it should be good enough
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 01:37:40AM +0200, Daniel Carrera wrote:
Btw, why is it called DBIC if CPAN says DBIx::Class?
For the same reason Mason isn't called HTML and Class::DBI isn't called
Class. The first part of a module's namespace is not necessarily how people
refer to it.
Being able to
On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 6:36 PM, Hans Dieter Pearcey
hdp.perl.catalyst.us...@weftsoar.net wrote:
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 01:37:40AM +0200, Daniel Carrera wrote:
Btw, why is it called DBIC if CPAN says DBIx::Class?
For the same reason Mason isn't called HTML and Class::DBI isn't called
19 matches
Mail list logo
