CGI-modules vs. CGI.pm 
Author Message
 CGI-modules vs. CGI.pm

Would someone please explain to me the difference between
CGI.pm and "CGI-modules"?  They're maintained by the same
guy (Lincoln Stein), and the README for CGI-modules says that
it duplicates some of the functionality of CGI.pm, and is
going to replace it... Yet in CPAN, CGI-modules is old
(last April) and CGI.pm is new (27 Jan).

???

John Porter



Tue, 18 Jul 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 CGI-modules vs. CGI.pm

JP> Would someone please explain to me the difference between
JP> CGI.pm and "CGI-modules"?  They're maintained by the same
JP> guy (Lincoln Stein), and the README for CGI-modules says that
JP> it duplicates some of the functionality of CGI.pm, and is
JP> going to replace it... Yet in CPAN, CGI-modules is old
JP> (last April) and CGI.pm is new (27 Jan).

I've never heard a definitive statement on this topic either.

If CGI-modules is no longer going to be developed, how about the
author marking it as abandoned code on the CPAN?

Posted and emailed...

--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Vivek Khera, Ph.D.                Khera Communications, Inc.

PGP/MIME spoken here              http://www.kciLink.com/home/khera/



Fri, 21 Jul 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 CGI-modules vs. CGI.pm

Quote:

> JP> the README for CGI-modules says that it duplicates some of the
> JP> functionality of CGI.pm, and is going to replace it... Yet in
> JP> CPAN, CGI-modules is old (last April) and CGI.pm is new (27
> JP> Jan).
> If CGI-modules is no longer going to be developed, how about the
> author marking it as abandoned code on the CPAN?

My understanding is this: Lincoln recognizes that CGI is too large and
monolithic, and adds too much stuff that many scripts don't need. So
he tries to unbundle it and make it more modular, hence CGI-modules.
On the other hand, the monolith is used by lots of people, because
it's so convenient to just "use CGI" and get the whole shebang. Thus
he adds improvements to CGI first, so as to satisfy more customers. He
adds them to CGI-modules (or re-modularizes CGI, I don't know his
process) every now and then, when he gets around to it.

The lesson is that if you don't have special CGI demands, use CGI.
What special demands does CGI-modules satisfy:
- faster startup. But you're better off using apache with mod_perl for
  this anyway.
- subclassing and similar development (i.e. not just using the
  existing CGI modules, but also adding to them).
- anything else?



Fri, 21 Jul 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 
 [ 3 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. cgi-lib.pl vs CGI.pm?

2. cgi-lib.pl vs CGI.pm

3. cgi.pm .vs. cgi-lib.pl

4. CGI.pm vs. Base.pm

5. !HELP with CGI.pm and CGI::* Modules!

6. CGI.pm v1.4: A Perl5 Module for CGI Scripting

7. Integrating SafePERL-CGI and CGI.pm/LWPWWW modules

8. CGI.pm functions vs OO

9. vvp:CGI.pm printing vs executing statments?

10. CGI.pm: procedural vs. OO

11. CGI.pm and POST vs GET methods

12. CGI.pm vs. mac characters

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software