Re: [PHP3] RE: [PHP Template] Template Discussion

Gary Bickford wrote:
> 
> How quaint.  This is exactly where PHP started, lo these many years ago.  It was
> (correct me Rasmus :O) a quickie template system that grew.  This is a point
> worth pondering.  Much template power will create a new language.  PHPLib is
> already close to a new language, requiring significantly different thought
> process and theory of operation.  Certainly the array support and object
> proto-support have completely redefined PHP development.  PHP3 is not the same
> language as PHP2.
> 
> It appears to me that templates have these purposes:
> 1.    Provide a simple way for non-PHP programmers to insert standard components
> - basically macros.
> 2.    Compatibility with WYSIWYG editors - work within and not be broken by
> editors, and use in template libraries and IDEs.
> 
> Perhaps "macro" would be a better term than "template".  It provides a better
> conceptual framework.  Nonprogrammers could work in a macro environment and
> seamlessly incorporate PHP-proper.
> 
> Does anyone remember MORTRAN?  Didn't C++ start out as a preprocessor for C?
> 

If such templates are little more than pre-processors then maybe
there's a need. The rub is that a language is defined by it's
syntax, and it's syntax defines, so some extent, the best way to
implement the language. I can't see the need to create a "fork"
for PHP, esp now since it's becoming so popular and useful.

I think RATFOR may be a better example :) Grey beards know what I'm
talking about ;)

-- 
===========================================================================
   Jim Jagielski   [|]   [email protected]   [|]   http://www.jaguNET.com/
                "Are you suggesting coconuts migrate??"