Re^5: A case where Mechanize works, LWP doesn't

You seem to be opposed to solving your problem, which stems from differences between what WWW::Mechanize sends and what LWP::UserAgent sends.

It can't be a "bad One-Off" of LWP, because both of your programs ultimately rely on LWP. WWW::Mechanize presents a more browser-like API+state for LWP::UserAgent, so things likely are different between using WWW::Mechanize and LWP::UserAgent.

But as you don't seem too interested in finding the differences, and also don't seem too interested in finding out how WWW::Mechanize works, I wonder what part of your question I'm missing. Maybe you can rephrase your question to help us help you better?

Comment on Re^5: A case where Mechanize works, LWP doesn't

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^6: A case where Mechanize works, LWP doesn't by dneedles (Sexton) on Feb 10, 2010 at 20:01 UTC
Ah I must have not been clear or missed an earlier post - so thanks for the persistence! I am VERY interested in the differences between LWP and Mechanize. Is there a write up somewhere comparing the two (beyond the perldoc?) I would greatly appreciate it! Also are there examples of using Mechanize with POE? I only found several LWP examples via articles and the online POE cookbook.	[reply]