And as a meta-note, I'm not sure The Monastery is a good place for you to submit bug reportsI dont have a bug report as much as I have a usage question.
nor demonstrate your ignorance in publicI see, well, I think it is a matter of how digestible and convenient the material is. By that token, each of the 3 O'Reilly books you've written should never have been written. None of the 3 offers a superset of the information contained in the Perl manpages... but you wrote them for a reason. You wrote them to give people with limited time amd attention span and possibly a less technical way of thinking an avenue into learning Perl.
If someone finished reading learning Perl and posted a question here on something beyond the scope of that book, would you have been so rude with your response? Would you have quoted something from perlvar and attempted to face-job them?
I'm sorry I have to be the one to take the bullets here. Someone had to ask the questions that everyone wanted answered too but didn't have the time/interest to stare at your source and then create a critical but constructive assessment (which took me about 2 hours to do and redo and rethink and reformulate).
But you do have a very nice product here. It allows me to think about where to put things and code large parts of a website I'm doing in isolation and then have Perl beautifully string together the parts as necessary. It is quite a work of genius, evolution and experience. The dot-com era needed this and some of the nicer Templating modules to avoid the "perl/CGI" impression of Perl that many people continue to stereotype Perl-based webapp development by.
In reply to Re: CGI::Prototype and use base
by metaperl
in thread CGI::Prototype and use base
by metaperl
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |