Re^2: Perl is dying

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Perl is dying by perrin (Chancellor) on Jul 14, 2006 at 19:10 UTC
Uh, Ruby on Rails runs on FastCGI.	[reply]
Re^4: Perl is dying by astroboy (Chaplain) on Jul 14, 2006 at 19:25 UTC
Which is, ironically, why I use FastCGI. mod_perl is too heavy for my needs (80% of my web requests don't require Perl in every HTTP process). I tried PersistentPerl/SpeedyCGI, liked it, but found a couple of bugs and the maintainer seems to have disappeared. I thought FastCGI was pretty much dead, then discovered that it's what Rails uses. Since it seems to be getting a new audience, I figured that I wouldn't be left in the lurch like I was with PersistentPerl.	[reply]
Re^5: Perl is dying by perrin (Chancellor) on Jul 14, 2006 at 20:21 UTC
Yeah, I don't recommend using mod_perl to serve static files on a site with much traffic. You should use a reverse proxy setup or similar for that, as described in the mod_perl docs, or use FastCGI. The nice thing about FastCGI's new popularity is it means ISPs are getting pressure to support it.	[reply]
Re^6: Perl is dying by bart (Canon) on Jul 14, 2006 at 21:50 UTC
Re^7: Perl is dying by perrin (Chancellor) on Jul 15, 2006 at 02:58 UTC
Some notes below your chosen depth have not been shown here
Re^3: Perl is dying by theorbtwo (Prior) on Jul 14, 2006 at 17:53 UTC
Hype isn't just generated by having a flashy homepage; it's also something generated by lots individuals. If you keep pointing out mod_perl, you perpetuate the myth that mod_perl is the best way to do not-CGI with perl. Would a better name and a better homepage fix things? Possibly, but not if people keep talking about mod_perl instead of fastcgi.	[reply]
Re^3: Perl is dying by eric256 (Parson) on Jul 14, 2006 at 18:00 UTC
All web based applications are CGI. Arn't they? Did I miss some change? Could be, dunno. AJAX: Actualy AJAX is new becuase it involves a new process (retrieving data from the server after the page has finished loading. Are you realy saying now that it doesn't even matter if the code/language is good or bad, it just doesn't have enough hype? Realy if your only concern is hype then start hyping the language instead of saying its dieing. Honestly if your the same AM as the OP then I'm very disappointed because the original rant was actualy quite well written and thought out, while this argument was just lame. ___________ Eric Hodges	[reply]
Re^4: Perl is dying by gellyfish (Monsignor) on Jul 14, 2006 at 18:49 UTC
Actualy AJAX is new becuase it involves a new process (retrieving data from the server after the page has finished loading. Well to be fair the XMLHttpRequest API (or rather its MS equivalent) has been available for about five years in IE and there were methods of doing similar things before that using tricks with frames and stuff. The API became available in Mozilla in 2002. I can't quite put my finger on when AJAX was first coined, but it was quite recently and the use of this raft of technologies certainly predated the naming. Update: The Wikipedia article on Ajax clearly indicates how far the use of these technologies predates the coining of the name. /J\	[reply]
Re^5: Perl is dying by bart (Canon) on Jul 14, 2006 at 21:46 UTC
The Wikipedia article on Ajax clearly indicates how far the use of these technologies predates the coining of the name. I thought people hated the name? Just to show that the name (IMO) most definitely isn't the reason for its success. It's the cool stuff that people can do with it, with as a prominent example: Google Maps.	[reply]
Re^6: Perl is dying by gellyfish (Monsignor) on Jul 14, 2006 at 21:57 UTC
Re^3: Perl is dying by marcus (Scribe) on Jul 17, 2006 at 17:25 UTC
Except Rails uses FastCGI for deployment too....	[reply]
Re^3: Perl is dying by Anonymous Monk on Aug 04, 2008 at 06:26 UTC
AJAX stands for Async Javascript and XML... not XHTML	[reply]
A reply falls below the community's threshold of quality. You may see it by logging in.