Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
"be consistent"
 
PerlMonks  

Re: RFC CGI.pm refactoring

by mirod (Canon)
on Feb 14, 2002 at 17:07 UTC ( #145499=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to RFC CGI.pm refactoring

Frankly I don't see the point: CGI.pm's main asset is that it works, it is used all over the web and is extremely robust.

Now maybe it is convoluted inside, and it does 2 things instead of one. But it is also very cleverly written and performances don't suffer from the slight feature bloat. In any case if you want performaces you can use mod_perl, I would think that starting a Perl interpreter is what takes up time, not loading CGI.pm.

So I for one am willing to take CGI.pm as a black box, size and all, and even to use the HTML generation methods for quick forms that do not justify using a templating system.

Using a smaller module does not IMHO justify the security (and stability) risk involved in using a new module.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://145499]
help
Chatterbox?
[karlgoethebier]: Eily, Discipulus : IMHO it's worth to ask in SoPW
[Discipulus]: dunno, it is the damned doublequote issue, i think
[karlgoethebier]: Eily: ah, i have v5.24.1
Discipulus is distracted by work..

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others chanting in the Monastery: (8)
As of 2017-07-21 08:45 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?
    I came, I saw, I ...
























    Results (319 votes). Check out past polls.