3 ms·

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_Attribute_Language http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_Attribute_Language is the most widespread example. We ended up s

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_Attribute_Language http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_Attribute_Language is the most widespread example. We ended up switching to haskell and using heist, which is the same type of deal. The "view first" thing was certainly very irritating, but minor overall compared to other weaknesses in the framework.

taeric 14y ago
Any better examples? Neither of those appear to have the same strengths I was referring to. (Not to say they are crap. Just not the same.) Though, similar to TylerE, I'm curious to hear what you think are the other weaknesses? Similarly, how do you feel it compares with its peers? (A peer being a JVM targeted framework.)
- papsosouid 14y ago
  I don't know what you are referring to. What strengths? They are html templates. If you are going to restrict "peers" to jvm frameworks then I really can't offer you anything. I haven't used any other jvm frameworks, I tried the two scala options (lift and play) and ran screaming.
  - taeric 14y ago
    First, apologies for taking so long to respond. I almost just edited my other post. (For some reason the "reply" link wasn't coming up.) Regardless. I see that the Heist language looks like early Lift templates. They got stronger with time. For the TAL stuff, it looks like logic is directly placed in an attribute. Probably both would be a far cry better than the stuff I have become accustomed to, however, Lift still seems stronger. Again, the difference comes in how the templates are "split" and placed in the app. The lift way just requires judicious useage of class names. Moving past that, though, I'm still interested to hear an analysis if you are up for giving it. While I'm most likely to only understand what I called "peer" comparisons, I'm interested in all. Edit: Further apologies in that I am likely not going to be able to respond for a while at this point. So, thanks for the discourse!
    - papsosouid 14y ago
      >They got stronger with time Stronger how? It is just a pseudo-html document tree being manipulated in scala. I'm not sure how it can become stronger or weaker. >For the TAL stuff, it looks like logic is directly placed in an attribute. It is placed wherever you want it. Using a TAL loop attribute is no different than doing the same thing in lift. The only difference is that lift doesn't show doing that in the docs, so people tend not to do it. >Again, the difference comes in how the templates are "split" and placed in the app I still don't understand what you mean. We literally took our lift templates and used them in heist just doing a search and replace s/lift://g. We just had to change the scala code "snippets" to be haskell code "splices". >I'm still interested to hear an analysis if you are up for giving it Lift assumes too much, and if you go outside those assumptions you are basically stranded. Combined with just being an immature framework where there's things missing/incomplete, and an outright hostile community, it makes things pretty difficult. Form handling was the biggest sticking point, especially when you want to have forms that aren't protected by their CSRF tokens and need to work with cookies disabled. It becomes a case of "well, we don't want to support that so just do it yourself from scratch". Play we had tons of issues with the weird scala templates they use. It would barf frequently on what appeared to be perfectly valid syntax. Combined with the "developing with play is super fast!" sales pitch, while being slower to recompile than lift was, we didn't bother spending much more time on it.
      - taeric 14y ago
        I should have made clearer that I am reading on those template engines right off. That is, I hadn't really heard of them till you mentioned them. Asking for more was simply on the lines of "if you have other examples right off." Regarding TAL. Looking at it, it did not look like it fed in the markup of the current tag to anything to process it. That is likely just my misreading of the wiki page. Regarding Heist. This could again just be my hasty reading, I think. I saw it said it was the same idea as the Lift templates. But then it jumped straight into the bind and apply tags. With the latest lift templates, there are no custom tags. Nor are there custom attributes. Also, I'm highly curious on the upsides of the Haskell framework you are using. And again, thanks for keeping this going!

taeric 14y ago

Any better examples? Neither of those appear to have the same strengths I was referring to. (Not to say they are crap. Just not the same.) Though, similar to TylerE, I'm curious to hear what you think are the other weaknesses? Similarly, how do you feel it compares with its peers? (A peer being a JVM targeted framework.)

papsosouid 14y ago
I don't know what you are referring to. What strengths? They are html templates. If you are going to restrict "peers" to jvm frameworks then I really can't offer you anything. I haven't used any other jvm frameworks, I tried the two scala options (lift and play) and ran screaming.
- taeric 14y ago
  First, apologies for taking so long to respond. I almost just edited my other post. (For some reason the "reply" link wasn't coming up.) Regardless. I see that the Heist language looks like early Lift templates. They got stronger with time. For the TAL stuff, it looks like logic is directly placed in an attribute. Probably both would be a far cry better than the stuff I have become accustomed to, however, Lift still seems stronger. Again, the difference comes in how the templates are "split" and placed in the app. The lift way just requires judicious useage of class names. Moving past that, though, I'm still interested to hear an analysis if you are up for giving it. While I'm most likely to only understand what I called "peer" comparisons, I'm interested in all. Edit: Further apologies in that I am likely not going to be able to respond for a while at this point. So, thanks for the discourse!
  - papsosouid 14y ago
    >They got stronger with time Stronger how? It is just a pseudo-html document tree being manipulated in scala. I'm not sure how it can become stronger or weaker. >For the TAL stuff, it looks like logic is directly placed in an attribute. It is placed wherever you want it. Using a TAL loop attribute is no different than doing the same thing in lift. The only difference is that lift doesn't show doing that in the docs, so people tend not to do it. >Again, the difference comes in how the templates are "split" and placed in the app I still don't understand what you mean. We literally took our lift templates and used them in heist just doing a search and replace s/lift://g. We just had to change the scala code "snippets" to be haskell code "splices". >I'm still interested to hear an analysis if you are up for giving it Lift assumes too much, and if you go outside those assumptions you are basically stranded. Combined with just being an immature framework where there's things missing/incomplete, and an outright hostile community, it makes things pretty difficult. Form handling was the biggest sticking point, especially when you want to have forms that aren't protected by their CSRF tokens and need to work with cookies disabled. It becomes a case of "well, we don't want to support that so just do it yourself from scratch". Play we had tons of issues with the weird scala templates they use. It would barf frequently on what appeared to be perfectly valid syntax. Combined with the "developing with play is super fast!" sales pitch, while being slower to recompile than lift was, we didn't bother spending much more time on it.
    - taeric 14y ago
      I should have made clearer that I am reading on those template engines right off. That is, I hadn't really heard of them till you mentioned them. Asking for more was simply on the lines of "if you have other examples right off." Regarding TAL. Looking at it, it did not look like it fed in the markup of the current tag to anything to process it. That is likely just my misreading of the wiki page. Regarding Heist. This could again just be my hasty reading, I think. I saw it said it was the same idea as the Lift templates. But then it jumped straight into the bind and apply tags. With the latest lift templates, there are no custom tags. Nor are there custom attributes. Also, I'm highly curious on the upsides of the Haskell framework you are using. And again, thanks for keeping this going!