If you are writing web client software, not using LWP would be a major oversight. So yes. Add that to the chanting litany. :)

I've used CGI for fun and have just started using it for profit just last week. I agree that it would be nice to have a module that was more easily broken down into its functional elements, but given that what we have works I don't see compelling reasons to change it-- at least not quickly.

On the server, my first guess is that speed is related more to your processor, your RAM, and whether or not you are maintaining your perl script in memory using something like mod_perl, than it is going to be related to whether or not the CGI module itself is "bloated".

As to whether we are "over loading" by bringing in functionality that we aren't going to use when we "use CGI;", so what? Every time I load perl I load lots of stuff I don't need-- it's an inherent danger in an interpreted language. The resulting executable is a hybrid of the interpreter and my code. And with a language that allows fancy stuff like eval() it gets even worse. Imagine a native C program that compiled and ran variable C code on the fly. (There's your spooky thought for Halloween. *grin* )