On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 18:24:22 +0900, Zev Blut <rubyzbibd / ubit.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 02:23:40 +0900, <Ara.T.Howard / noaa.gov> wrote:
> 
> > i thought i was the only one still using amrita!  development seems to
> > have
> > died on it, but i still find it's feature set the richest and the
> > code/template separation the cleanest of the engines i've tried.
> 
> It appears that Amrita has new maintainers and that the site has moved
> to here: http://amrita.sourceforge.jp/index.html
> 
> I too am pretty enamored with it.  I especially like the parts template
> addition, which I find to be quite powerful.
> 
> > what's your take on the current crop of template engines vs. amrita?
> > i've
> > been out of web development for a bit but am starting a new project and
> > trying
> > to make an assesment of the ruby tools out there.
> 
> My biggest complaint with Amrita is that is its' performance.
> Although, for my current needs that has not been too much of a
> problem.  I have tried to look into the other engines, but as soon as
> start to see custom tags or erb/asp/jsp like syntax I tend to stop my
> investigation.  I guess I have spoiled myself with Amrita :-)
> Although, I could be swayed if some of the other template engines
> have something like parts template.

Give XTemplate a spin -- with a little work to emulate hashes in your
objects, you can use arbitrary objects as data, as in Amrita, and it
works nicely and fast.