Re: [PHP Template] Opinion on PHP Template Engine spec revision 0.52

On Tue, 21 Mar 2000, jm wrote:
> The smart stuff is in the php code.
> 
> What basically the template needs to have is:
>   +  variable
>   + "loop" (which lacks in the perl fasttemplate and has been incorporated 
> in the php version)
>   + speed  (so maybe some kind of caching mecanism is needed)
> 
> 
> No need for "smart" stuffs like conditional or any preprocessor like 
> instruction.
> that can be done in php if dynamic is needed,
> or with some preprocessor if the logic has to be done once.
> 
> I'd like the template engine to be kept simple,
> so web designer (some who never WROTE html, just use cool tools
> like dreamweaver or worse ones like xxx ) can understand and write templates.
> I don't need them to write the logic. The logic is on the php side.
> HTML has no logic. WebDesigners don't need to design "logic".
> 
> 
> Basically, I don't want SMART templates,
> I want a simple and standard template engine, so everyone coding php will 
> start to use it.
> That is what my work experience showed me.

Nothing in the current template engine prevents you from using
variable/loop combination. Nothing forces you to go beyond that. I
simply don't understand why you people object to _optional_ features
that may come in handy some day.

Or maybe you should use FastTemplate.

> Now, may be I'm dumb and I need enlightement,
> so  what exactly is the advantage of SMART templates,
> instead of simple templates and smart PHP code ??
> Concretely I mean. Real world example I mean.

Localization. There's your real world example.

-Andrei

"Computers are useless. They can only give you answers."
                               --Pablo Picasso