Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

use Perl

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

Reading up on MVC, part 1: Ruby on Rails More | Login | Reply

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Without JavaScript enabled, you might want to use the classic discussion system instead. If you login, you can remember this preference.

Don't forget Rack based frameworks (Score:1)

by yft (9260)

Don't forget the simple but effective 'Rack'. I find Rails and Merb etc to be too complex. If you need mod_perl like raw power, Rack is the way to go. I wrote about it at http://blogs.yellowfish.biz/2009/our-application-development-setup-and-why-json- rocks/ [yellowfish.biz]
- Re: (Score:1)
  
  by masak (6289)
  It might please you to learn that Web.pm aims to have a full port of Rack at its core. The idea is that people should be able to choose the level of abstraction they want to build their web app on. The levels are something along the lines of:
  
  A minimal setup. (Rack.)
  Templating.
  MVC.
  That last level is the reason I'm investigating MVC frameworks at present.
  - Re:Don't forget Rack based frameworks (Score:1)
    
    by sri (5109) on 2009.06.29 8:04 (#69172) Homepage Journal
    
    If your aim is to have a full Rack port maybe you should call it Rack or Web::Rack? Web.pm seems a bit too generic, after all there will be alternatives and they'll need a namespace too.
    
    Reply to This
    
    Parent
    - Re: (Score:1)
      
      by masak (6289)
      
      Noted.
      For various reasons I'm not inclined to discuss the naming of Web.pm via a blog commenting system. I'll happily move the discussion to IRC or email, though.

Get More Comments

Stories, comments, journals, and other submissions on use Perl; are Copyright 1998-2006, their respective owners.