comment on

CGI.pm is definitely been better than what most new programmers could write on the first try.

Now, that's an understatement.

But by the same token, it would be easier for most people to write their own CGI handler,

Crap.

MIME parser,

Even more crap,

browser isolation layer,

still more crap,

and formatting system

We're reaching the limit of the sewage system here, folks.

than to figure out CGI.pm.

This (one of the worst posts I have seen on Perlmonks (--) rehashes all the arguments put out by stubborn newbies who for some reason nobody can fathom insist on reinventing the wheel every time instead of using good code written by someone else. Witness all those people who refuse to use File::Find and File::Copy. Why, why, why, why?

Sorry about the rant and the strong language but this is a pet peeve of mine. I feel I made no progress in learning Perl until I started to use its features and modules rather than try to use it as some sort of complex version of C.

Regards,
Helgi Briem

In reply to Re: Re: Re: RFC CGI.pm refactoring by helgi
in thread RFC CGI.pm refactoring by tachyon

Are you posting in the right place? Check out Where do I post X? to know for sure.
Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags. Currently these include the following:
<code> <a> <b> <big> <blockquote> <br /> <dd> <dl> <dt> <em> <font> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr /> <i> <li> <nbsp> <ol> <p> <small> <strike> <strong> <sub> <sup> <table> <td> <th> <tr> <tt> <u> <ul>
Snippets of code should be wrapped in <code> tags not <pre> tags. In fact, <pre> tags should generally be avoided. If they must be used, extreme care should be taken to ensure that their contents do not have long lines (<70 chars), in order to prevent horizontal scrolling (and possible janitor intervention).
Want more info? How to link or How to display code and escape characters are good places to start.


No such thing as a small change
	PerlMonks