It is interesting to see how people are against the idea of writing a replacement of CGI.PM because new code is worse to begin with. However one big point in favor of this replacement code is that you can see how CGI works under the hood.
365 days of using CGI.PM as a library can never teach you that. I may not want to read the CGI.PM library precisely because it is mature and full of error checks and utilities that do not let me see the "essence". so such code at least has a __teaching__ aspect and should be applauded for that.
And maybe it is okay to reinvent the wheel once in a while otherwise we can never make it rounder..In reply to Re^2: Get those parameters without CGI.pm
by rjha94
in thread Get those parameters without CGI.pm
by j.a.p.h.
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |