http://www.perlmonks.org?node_id=412010


in reply to Review: CGI::Prototype

Interesting discussion. I must say, I'm quite flattered that Randal Schwartz would take such a personal interest in my little bit of code.

While I am sure that his module will no doubt correct all the shortcomings in my CGI::Application, I worry that he might not be able to compete with the idyllic simplicity of CGI::Application::Plus. <g>

-Jesse-

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Review: CGI::Prototype
by Anonymous Monk on Dec 03, 2004 at 18:52 UTC
    Don't be too flattered :) See merlyn likes to be able to say "I didn't like this other thing, so I wrote my own" without looking too hard and C::A made an easy target (easy).
      File::Finder one-upped File::Find quite nicely. His replacements have usually been good. I tend to look at hold his modules, Damian's, Simon Cozens', and Brian Ingerson's a little higher in regard ... but only because respect is earned. They write things that do good work for me. Note: I'm not Merlyn.
        I think you mean File::Finder vs File::Find::Rule. And in fact, that's true. I looked at the prior art in File::Find::Rule, even the implementation, and decided I could do better. And I both acknowledge that in the docs (about FFR), I also embrace the existing FFR plugins with my own "ffr" method in File::Finder.

        But everyone seems uppity that I'm trying to do the same thing with CGI::Application. No, please, no. I looked at everything out there for what I needed for my client. Nothing worked. I didn't set out to define a "better CGI::Application". I set out to define a generic MVC metacontroller that would easily subclass to be the controllers I needed for a few of my clients. Nobody has done that. CGI::Application isn't it, nor does it pretend to be it.

        So, please stop comparing this to CGI::Application, any more than you'd compare Template Toolkit to Embperl. They're not the same class of framework. They have different goals.

        -- Randal L. Schwartz, Perl hacker
        Be sure to read my standard disclaimer if this is a reply.