Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from May 2013
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 12:06:49PM +0300, Alexandr Ciornii wrote: > Hello > > 2013/5/24 Ricardo Signes <perl.p5p@rjbs.manxome.org>: > > > > I think it's time to seriously consider removing CGI.pm from the core > > distribution. It is no longer what I'd point *anyone* at for writing *any* > > sort of web code. It is in the core, as far as I know, because once it was the > > state of the art, and a major reason for many people to use the language. I > > don't think either is true now. > > Many people still use programs that use CGI.pm, for ex. from NMS > collection. And CGI.pm is easiest to start with. I'm aware of NMS, and that it was deliberately targeting CGI.pm to promote modules, code re-use, and not screwing up security related issues things like parameter parsing. Presumably every web framework out there is having to deal with form parameters and URI escaping/unescaping. And avoid making goofs. And deal with changes like ';' instead of '&'. Is there something small which just does this? Should the core be providing such foundation functionality? (Although then you get to HTML entities, which starts to get big?) > > Finally, if you need CGI, it's easy to install > > after installing perl, just like everything else we've dropped from the core > > distribution. > > It would not be easy to do on web hosting which does not has > possibility of installing modules from CPAN. Also currently CGI.pm > requires FCGI which requires compiler which frequently is not > installed. Yes, this is strange. The core merrily ships CGI.pm without FCGI, yet the CPAN version of CGI.pm insists that FCGI is a hard dependency. Clearly the dependency can't be a hard dependency, else the version shipped by the core wouldn't work. And, as you say, the dependency makes it hard to install (or upgrade) CGI.pm on a system without a compiler. What stops CGI.pm making FCGI optional? Or splitting out the FCGI support into a separate distribution? > > In the past two years, all my interactions with CGI.pm have been to fix bugs or > > send pull requests to quiet it from making noise in the core. I expect others > > here have had the same experience. > > I use CGI::Applications (mostly for old programs), it uses CGI.pm. > Also if I need a very simple web program, I use CGI.pm directly. But you have to install CGI::Applications from CPAN. So it shouldn't be any harder to install CGI.pm and CGI::Applications from CPAN. Nicholas ClarkThread Previous | Thread Next