They all do it the exact same way :) the modules are different, but its all the same 100%
my $object = CGI->new; ## NOTHING TO GRUMBLE ABOUT HERE
They're all basically HTTP::Requests (HTTP::Messages), you get access to headers, you get a request object, which gives you access to params , or to file uploads ,or to the raw content if you want it
They're all the same everywhere in every programming language; the details are different (app->cookies versus request->headers->cookie ... lots of overlap and shortcuts )
Some advanced features include dumping the request to harddisk for lower memory usage and providing a filehandle to this temporary ...
similar advanced feature is stream-from-disk instead of loading in memory for responses
Mojo::Message::Request, Dancer::Request, Dancer2::Core::Request, Catalyst::Request, Apache::Request, Apache2::Request, Plack::Request
Unlike CGI.pm (which does a bunch) most of these have a corresponding ::Response object and various helpers, but thats about all the difference
All the frameworks give you a request object
All the frameworks want you to give them a response object
CGI.pm is very flexible but its about print not return for responses; if you use CGI::Application framework you get the same organization (request/response, no printing)
Most folks reflexively badmouthing CGI.pm are extremely ignorant about it
If you're using CGI.pm and following CGI to mod_perl Porting. mod_perl Coding guidelines you're 98% modern , only 2% away from using any "modern frameworks" which have a response object
In reply to Re: How does Dancer handle forms? How do other such frameworks do it?
by Anonymous Monk
in thread How does Dancer handle forms? How do other such frameworks do it?
by Cody Fendant
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |