[erlang-questions] newbie web-development advice / guidance

[Kenny Stone]

Nitrogen has a very cool new(ish) feature where you can use both nitrogen
and webmachine in the same project pretty easily.

Kenny

On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 9:55 PM, OvermindDL1 <overminddl1@REDACTED> wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 12:17 PM, Icarus Alive <icarus.alive@REDACTED>
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 7:43 PM, OvermindDL1 <overminddl1@REDACTED>
> wrote:
> >> For note, my background is also 15+ years of C++, and although it and
> Erlang
> >> are different, C++ templates are very much similar to Erlangs syntax
> (and
> >> dang near identical to Haskell), so if you were a heavy template writer
> like
> >> I am then think of it that way.  I jumped into Erlang and picked it up
> very
> >> quickly.
> >
> > @OvermindDL1, very glad to hear that. Not familiar with Haskell, but
> > C++ templates are a familiar territory.
> >
> >> Oh, and I use Nitrogen, mostly as I like to generate pages in code and
> theme
> >> and layout using css; I try to use as little straight html as possible,
> but
> >> using html directly is something Zotonic if good at if you prefer that.
> >>
> >> I can help with your C++ to Erlang mental conversions if you want.
> >
> > That would be really a great help. However, if you (or anyone else
> > here) had a chance to compare Nitrogen & Zotonic on the developer
> > efficiency and learning-curve aspects, would be good to hear. Also,
> > how does it compare in performance terms, i.e. programmatic HTML
> > generation in Erlang code, versus template driven HTML generation
> > using a dedicated templating engine (if I understood it correctly).
>
> I have not yet used Zotonic myself, but from what I gather they do
> about the same things but in different ways.
>
> It seems Nitrogen likes to generate web pages in code, although it can
> use templates.
> It seems Zotonic likes to generate web pages in templates, although it
> can use code.
> Zotonic seems to have a few more features then Nitrogen, but are
> easily made in Nitrogen thanks to its pure-code extension system.
>
> I chose Nitrogen because I prefer code to generate pages, my pages are
> mostly informational server stuff, so I do not need an html kid to do
> those things for me, but if you had one, maybe Zotonic?
>
> Both are quite fast, even the templates (from my understanding) are
> compiled to Erlang compiled beam files so there should not be any real
> difference.
>
>
> On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 10:51 AM, Jon Watte <jwatte@REDACTED> wrote:
> > The "web" pages I've written in Erlang are mostly just status and
> management
> > REST interfaces for a system whose main goal is something else, but what
> > I've found so far:
> >
> > If you want a web interface where you take the request once headers are
> > parsed and the request decoded, use mochiweb.
> >
> > If you want an industrial-strength HTTP protocol server stack (things
> like
> > content type negotiation, etc) for a REST-only implementation, use
> > webmachine.
>
> Exactly.  Nitrogen/Zotonic are good for making the more direct
> 'website' kind of interface, but for making web services, something
> raw like mochiweb/cowboy or webmachine (webmachine excels at REST more
> then anything else) are better.
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> erlang-questions@REDACTED
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20110802/35b5fdc0/attachment.htm>