Forum OpenACS Development: Re: Templating Tool for Tcl
And? My templating system works even without plain tclsh for the compile part (can you run 'make'?). But any tclsh can read the compiled output.
But your comment "(Plus probably the same for the db_* database API, lots of the Tcl utility code, etc.)" is very instructive. This tool is the View component of the MVC design pattern. Excluded from the View component is the Model component...and the Controller component. This is the entire point from beginning to end.
If you look over all of the code I have written you will find that I don't produce highly specialized components. They are intentionally designed for reuse. This tiny part (templating) of a larger system is a good example. If you need the database component, I have improvements to the db_* API which work with just AOLserver (not yet just tclsh). Yes it works better than the db_* API, and works with abstract datasources like files, ldap, etc. This is not about the Model component.
I hold OpenACS in very high regard. If you disagree with this please find a comment where I have not shown this regard. I usually get in trouble here by supporting what I believe are the basic foundations of OpenACS. My usual, and probably tiresome complaint is that too many features get pushed down into the core functions.
So if you want to complain that I have not provided a large enough package, I will agree with that. This software solves exactly one problem. That is it.
But your comment seems very strange to me. First consider the fact that nobody has to use this code. And I agree that most, maybe all, here will not be using it. (If they do, I might have to do some work.) Why should this software conform to the needs of OpenACS? I'm not writing software for inclusion in OpenACS core, so who cares? Maybe this has been my point for year after year. I don't force my idiotic code on anyone else. I am happy to write my code for my own reasons. Yet somehow it is more acceptable to complain about code which has not even been proposed to become part of OpenACS than to complain about actual committed code. WTF?
Enough of that. I am very happy to see this comment:
"How many people here have anything more than an academic interest in another incompatible templating system?"
Yes incompatible. The ATS is so compatible with OpenACS. So when I introduce a templating system which is compatible with OpenACS and tclsh somehow that is incompatible. My templating system is about as incompatible as any other unix command. Assuming you can compile a simple program, if not, you probably cannot compile AOLserver or Tcl.
Finally, your comment: "Whatever interesting features your stand alone templating system has, well, I'd rather see you consider integrating them into OpenACS!"
Here is an idea: do what I do. Release all of your code, talk about it, offer it up for criticism and analysis, make an ass out of yourself and make mistakes, be willing to admit you are a total idiot, be willing and very interested in being convinced that you are wrong.
Why would I waste my time writing this junk code?
I think it started pretty simply. The ATS tried to reinvent the expression syntax. There was one operator 'in' which didn't work; it was like a regexp. But certain things required using <% syntax which was part of the AOLserver templating system. So ATS was not complete. In addition, the use of the escapes into pure Tcl code is a huge security risk, worse than that, you can't accept a user template because they could be unsafe.
My templating system is safe. You can accept a user supplied template and know that it can't do serious damage. You can also rest easy that your template writers cannot exploit the system or make an unfortunate mistake. Templates are safe! Is that important to you? Maybe not. It is to me. Does it require Tcl packages or OpenACS db_* commands? NO!!!!! I'm not sitting around reinventing the wheel. But I am inventing stuff, which is available for anyone with a browser. More important, nobody is subjected to using it!
I will continue to write software which has a minimum of requirements. If I think this might be useful to the OpenACS community, I will announce it. But I'm not going to specialize my software beyond what is required.
I never got around to pointing out that my template compiler actually does syntax checking. If the template isn't valid, it won't compile. Also, the partial result is placed into a temporary file, which you can examine and pretty easily figure out the error. Important to you? Maybe not. It is important to me. ATS templates are difficult to debug.