From: gabriele renzi Date: 2004-07-26T07:11:54+09:00 Subject: Re: rubyonrails and cgikit comparison il Mon, 26 Jul 2004 03:48:30 +0900, Florian Weber ha scritto:: >> That's just the point we disagree on. I don't think we should have >> real programming in the template(like references to variables), some >> basic logic only. In short, I like the presence of the binding, you >> don't. That's ok with me ;-) > >why shouldnt we have a real programming language in the template? > >what if the presentation logic in our template is very very complicated? >just moving the complicated presentation logic out of the template into >another part like a binding or a ruby class doesnt change anything. its >just a form of indirection.. > I think you're missing Raphael's point: he's not talking about ok vs %if foo ok %end He's saying that he does not want to have 'foo' referencing something real (i.e. the parameters passed to the page) cause that adds coupling beetween the view logic and the business logic. He just prefers to have that level of indirection where he can have 'foo' as a placeholder for, say, a 'show=true' passed to the page or a Time.now==XMas_day or a sql query result. You don't like that level of indirection and it's ok (I think I agree), but it's not really a question of presentation logic in template languages or in real programming languages.