Re: Re: CGI_Lite vs. CGI::Simple

[perrin]

All it does is load CGI_Lite and parse cookies. Nothing else.

[tachyon]

If that's all you need why not call CGI::Cookie or CGI::Simple::Cookie directly? You don't need to call CGI/CGI::Simple at all as these modules have their own APIs....

use CGI::Cookie;
use Data::Dumper;
my %cookies = fetch CGI::Cookie;
print "Content-type: text/html\n\n", Dumper \%cookies;

cheers

tachyon

s&&rsenoyhcatreve&&&s&n.+t&"$'$`$\"$\&"&ee&&y&srve&&d&&print

[perrin]

It's a good idea. Unfortunately, CGI::Cookie requires CGI, which slows the script down massively. CGI::Simple::Cookie is measurably slower than CGI_Lite at this. Remember, compile times are part of it and that may be the only problem for CGI::Simple -- it uses two separate files.

I'm currently working on getting fastCGI to run with this setup, because it's absurd to have to think about the number of files being used as a performance problem.