in reply to Re: CGI versus CGI::* modules
in thread CGI versus CGI::* modules

CGI was designed to be easy to implement.

So was HTML.

How does your hand-rolled implementation handle P3P cookies? While you're adding support for those, have you considered CGI::Pretty?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: CGI versus CGI::* modules
by jonadab (Parson) on Aug 07, 2003 at 13:15 UTC
    How does your hand-rolled implementation handle P3P cookies?

    Considering that no browser I know about requires P3P by default, and that P3P is basically a placebo, I never saw the point.


    $;=sub{$/};@;=map{my($a,$b)=($_,$;);$;=sub{$a.$b->()}} split//,".rekcah lreP rehtona tsuJ";$\=$ ;->();print$/

      Wow. New installations of IE 6 require P3P by default. I spent a couple of weeks fighting that last year. I'm surprised you've never seen it.

        New installations of IE 6 require P3P by default

        A little web searching seems to indicate that this is only an issue for third-party cookies. I have no plans ever to make use of third-party cookies (WHY?), so unless I'm missing something I still have no need for P3P.


        $;=sub{$/};@;=map{my($a,$b)=($_,$;);$;=sub{$a.$b->()}} split//,".rekcah lreP rehtona tsuJ";$\=$ ;->();print$/

        I've never seen a new install of IE6. All IE6 installs I've seen were upgrades from IE5 or earlier. (This of course will change with time, so it's good for me to know about new installs of IE6 requiring P3P. Does that mean they will (by default) silently discard all non-P3P cookies? Wow, half the web would break...)


        $;=sub{$/};@;=map{my($a,$b)=($_,$;);$;=sub{$a.$b->()}} split//,".rekcah lreP rehtona tsuJ";$\=$ ;->();print$/