[development] Module Builder Module 1.0

Darrel O'Pry dopry at thing.net
Tue Feb 21 21:08:41 UTC 2006

On Tue, 2006-02-21 at 12:55 -0700, Greg Knaddison wrote:
> On 2/21/06, Ber Kessels <ber at webschuur.com> wrote:
> > Pity. I announced on all the MLs, several times that I was working on this.
> > Our code differs rather a lot, so I think we will have two in a few weeks :)
> > the use and methods of mine are shaped after RoR.
> I read your descriptions of sympal on ML and your blog and didn't see
> the module scaffolding as a feature of it - I think it was easy to
> miss.
> Also, I don't see the pity about duplication of efforts on this. 
> AFAIK, Drupal Module generation is a relatively new idea and having
> multiple implementations of new ideas can be a good thing.
> I look forward to testing/using both of these.
> Regards,
> Greg

While I think there is some merit to building a module skeleton
generator. I've found over time it is just quicker to write a module
ground-up than to go through wizards to create a module skeleton.(You
mileage may vary...) 

To me a more useful end, and I'm not sure if you're thinking in this
direction, is using the module skeleton generator as a basis for a real
module builder that can convert CCK content types and VIEWS to first
class modules, and provide data migration routines. 

I think cck and views are god sends, but I don't think they are ideal
for sites that hope to get hit hard and heavy, where more normalized
table structures, and less code abstraction can make a big difference.

The again the time and memory used for 20 custom modules(loading and
compiling included) may be more than that used by 1 cck module with 20
content type definitions and associated views.


More information about the development mailing list