Are there any modern (Moose/PSGI) web frameworks other than Catalyst?
Asked Answered
O

2

8

Are there any Perl web-development frameworks other than Catalyst that are:

  • written with Moose
  • natively written for PSGI (not with some PSGI-emulation)
  • Unicode ready/safe - so Perl 5.10+
  • small, extensible and nice

or is Catalyst the only guy in the town? :)

AFAIK, Dancer, Mojolicious, Jifty are not Moose-core

Orchardman answered 29/7, 2011 at 8:54 Comment(0)
E
6

Here is my favorite one - Mason.

It is usually used as templating engine only, but with some discipline you can use it as VC framework (read: not enforcing separation and doing nothing for Models, Views are natural, Controllers you can done with dhandlers and with the RouterSimple plugin).

Edith answered 29/7, 2011 at 9:43 Comment(1)
Too clarify, Mason is Mason 2.0, where HTML::Mason (also called Mason) is Mason 1.x. Just saw a presentation on Mason by J Swartz. Model stuff you should be handling in normal Perl modules. V&C he believes should be more tightly coupled due to his experience that shows them as already coupled. I haven't tried it yet, but it looks very interesting, it fixes some of what bugged be about HTML::Mason, yet retains the philosophy of doing the minimum needed to make a great templating language. Between PSGI middleware and available plugins, Mason should give you a solid platform to build on.Luker
Q
10

The only other one that comes to my mind os Ox. It's a pretty nice framework in many ways and does match all of your requirements. Sadly, though, its user base is somewhat small and you'll end up re-inventing a lot of things you could've ready re-used off of CPAN if you had gone with Catalyst. But sometimes that's just what you want to do for certain applications, so I'm happy it exists.

Quass answered 29/7, 2011 at 10:38 Comment(0)
E
6

Here is my favorite one - Mason.

It is usually used as templating engine only, but with some discipline you can use it as VC framework (read: not enforcing separation and doing nothing for Models, Views are natural, Controllers you can done with dhandlers and with the RouterSimple plugin).

Edith answered 29/7, 2011 at 9:43 Comment(1)
Too clarify, Mason is Mason 2.0, where HTML::Mason (also called Mason) is Mason 1.x. Just saw a presentation on Mason by J Swartz. Model stuff you should be handling in normal Perl modules. V&C he believes should be more tightly coupled due to his experience that shows them as already coupled. I haven't tried it yet, but it looks very interesting, it fixes some of what bugged be about HTML::Mason, yet retains the philosophy of doing the minimum needed to make a great templating language. Between PSGI middleware and available plugins, Mason should give you a solid platform to build on.Luker

© 2022 - 2024 — McMap. All rights reserved.