[Templates] Can there be two?

[Paul Seamons]

> > So it is only 50% faster on the cached in memory templates.  It is
> > actually slower if you are using XS.  If you are using cached in memory
> > templates, you are going to see the least amount of return from using
> > CGI::Ex::Template.
>
> I would expect any TT user concerned about performance to be using
> cached templates and the XS stash.

I think most people are concerned about performance - even if it is a second 
thought.  I think there are plenty of people who don't have a choice about
how the server they're using is configured.

I do agree though that those who are really really concerned about the 
performance have tuned their code to the nth level.

> > The interesting thing is that TT in memory and using XS is only 100%
> > faster than CGI::Ex::Template getting a new object each time.  Without
> > XS, TT in memory is only 40% faster than CGI::Ex::Template getting a new
> > object each time.
>
> Sounds like it could be great for people who are stuck using CGI.

Yup. :)

> TT 
> doesn't perform well without the cache.

Bare TT does OK.  Stash XS and cached templates just do better.  
CGI::Ex::Template just is a step towards making them not be as necessary.

Of course I don't think there is anything keeping somebody from writing the 
get_variable and set_variable routines of CGI::Ex::Template in xs.  That 
would be interesting.

Paul