What he's saying is that it should be followed if you want to make your life easier.

Do you (or does he) care to elaborate? I think it depends on requirements. It is a convention, and so it often is followed. OTOH, it's just a convention, and it often is not followed. I think the current state of affairs has come about by real world pressures. Without explanation, I think the gentleman is, at best, oversimplifying.

Well, keeping in mind that it is assumed that your GETs never change server state, then it makes a lot of sense considering the problem he is trying to address.

I must be missing something. What's the problem he is trying to solve with redirects?

Note that if you think I "accused" you of writing C-ish Perl, then at the same time I "accused" myself of writing LISP-ish Perl.

Oh, I know. And I did take it a bit personally, I guess. Really, that's because of the associations to both C and LISP that I have in my own mind. Things like... LISP: pure, clean, fun. C: applied, messy, work. It's also ingrained into me that "writing C in Perl" is something to be avoided. I do know that your comment wasn't pejorative, though. ;-)

-sauoq
"My two cents aren't worth a dime.";

In reply to Re: Re^2: Falling for the same trap - since 1942 by sauoq
in thread Falling for the same trap since 1942 by Aristotle

Title:
Use:  <p> text here (a paragraph) </p>
and:  <code> code here </code>
to format your post; it's "PerlMonks-approved HTML":