Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
laziness, impatience, and hubris
 
PerlMonks  

Re: CGI::Application - why?

by xdg (Monsignor)
on May 15, 2006 at 02:08 UTC ( #549375=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to CGI::Application - why?

Is the real question why use modular code for writing CGI scripts instead of one big script? Or is your question specific to CGI::Application?

In the general sense, modular code for CGI has the same benefits of reusability and abstraction as modular code for anything else. Most of the popular CGI builders and frameworks take that approach, just like CGI::Application, e.g. Catalyst, CGI::Prototype, Gantry, Jifty, Maypole, just to name a few (alphabetically), and there are many more.

Specific to CGI::Application (and other things, too, really) -- why have the .cgi just a thin wrapper around a module? I think that's mostly because you need an executable of some sort and .pm files aren't usually structured to work that way. It's possible -- see How a script becomes a module -- but doesn't really save you much code.

-xdg

Code written by xdg and posted on PerlMonks is public domain. It is provided as is with no warranties, express or implied, of any kind. Posted code may not have been tested. Use of posted code is at your own risk.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Domain Nodelet?
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://549375]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others avoiding work at the Monastery: (1)
As of 2022-01-21 05:55 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?
    In 2022, my preferred method to securely store passwords is:












    Results (57 votes). Check out past polls.

    Notices?