I did say that they all (all major Perl web frameworks) have sessions; and not only that but they are more secure without trying in Mojo and entirely configurable in a case like Catalyst so you can do sessions without cookies if necessary and keep the data on the backend in several different ways without any need for a database, again if necessary or preferable. I feel like you are intentionally reading my comments lightly. :|
I also said if you want to use Mason because you like embedded code, you might as well stick with PHP. There will be no practical difference in what you do if that is the style you like and deployment will be harder with Perl than host default PHP. I should re-emphasize code embedded templates (meaning, controllers and models are all embedded in the view) is a mess for any serious project and it might come off snooty but it's not meant to be: I do not know any devs I consider serious or competent who write Perl this way. If you try to write it that way, you might end up blaming Perl for giving you the rope and moving on to Python or Ruby next because they force better practices in this domain.
I want to repeat learning curve. Catalyst in particular is quite hard to learn because it has so much it can do. Once a site is done though, adding features, changing things, testing (Mojo has really good testing too and Dancer is well-liked though I don't use it), all becomes extremely easy and make painting yourself into codebase corners less likely.
In reply to Re^3: perl as a php alternative
by Your Mother
in thread perl as a php alternative
by iaw4
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |