Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
There's more than one way to do things

Re: CGI versus CGI::* modules

by chromatic (Archbishop)
on Jul 31, 2003 at 21:07 UTC ( #279791=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to CGI versus CGI::* modules

CGI has generated XHTML compliant code for years. Are you using a really old version?

I see two good reasons to use CGI instead of something else. One, if you're using its HTML-generation functions in a large codebase, it might not be worth switching. Two, if you want to pass in a blessed filehandle and have it read data from there instead of STDIN, many of the replacements don't handle that correctly.

(Yes, this is a plea for tachyon to release CGI::Simple 0.07 soon! :)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: CGI versus CGI::* modules
by tachyon (Chancellor) on Aug 02, 2003 at 10:05 UTC

    CGI-Simple-0.071 Ran out of excuses. Don't ask why 0.071 (read Changes). Thanks once again for the patch even if it took a rather long time to apply it. Its got your blessed glob patch, p3p support, a minor unicode bugfix, 0 val cookie fix and some mod perl upload fixes.




Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://279791]
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others contemplating the Monastery: (2)
As of 2021-05-14 02:03 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?
    Perl 7 will be out ...

    Results (147 votes). Check out past polls.