Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from May 2013
On Fri, 24 May 2013 12:06:49 +0300, Alexandr Ciornii <alexchorny@gmail.com> 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. For extremely simple and easy things I also still use CGI, but I still vote for CORE-removal. CPAN is good-enough. Really. The core decision is not to deprecate CGI as a module, it is trying to remove the bundling with CORE. > > 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. > > > 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. -- H.Merijn Brand http://tux.nl Perl Monger http://amsterdam.pm.org/ using perl5.00307 .. 5.17 porting perl5 on HP-UX, AIX, and openSUSE http://mirrors.develooper.com/hpux/ http://www.test-smoke.org/ http://qa.perl.org http://www.goldmark.org/jeff/stupid-disclaimers/Thread Previous | Thread Next