use Perl

• Make it modular, flexible just like Catalyst (Score:1)

  by oliver (7451)

  I think one of the reasons there are so many CRUD systems for Catalyst, and none of them ever feels right, is because the CRUD system is almost an anti-Catalyst concept.

  Catalyst as you say is all about choices, flexibility in application, etc. A CRUD system is (usually) a drop-in single "app" which works with ORM X and HTML templating system Y. So each CRUD system has a different X and Y. I could see CRUD working far better for, say, Jifty.

  I am the author of one such Catalyst CRUD system, and I fully ac
  • Re: (Score:1)

    by xsawyerx (8978)

    I think CatalystX::ListFramework::Builder was the one I haven't tried yet but wanted to. Usually when you start checking these things out, you get discouraged pretty quickly and don't even remember what you tried or didn't try.

    It's definitely the prettiest, and I'm checking the tinyurl.com slides right now. I think I'll try it today. Thank you.

    Usually I write my own CRUD because:

    1. I want it done fast
    2. I want to make some checks in the way

    There's a major problem I think in this area because it's tricky. F
    • Re:Make it modular, flexible just like Catalyst (Score:1)

      by oliver (7451) on 2009.02.13 5:13 (#67336) Homepage Journal

      Yes by all means have a poke and feedback on LFB is welcome - but at the same time I completely understand why you would want to go a different way.

      LFB, as a "first stab" at this type of application, was a good learning experience and highlighted to me much of why CRUD is Hard to do right. But LFB is a mess of design, it's true.

      If you look at the last slide of my LPW talk, I'm basically saying the same as you - what we need is a generic CRUD layer, or really a set of layers which conform to an API. Then you could have different frontends (ExtJS, plain HTML, etc), different ORM plugins, and so on. That would be my ideal.

      Reply to This

      Parent