RE: [cgiapp] CGI::App 3.2_mls5 available

2004-01-05 Thread Jesse Erlbaum
Hey Mark -- I'd like to revive the idea that someday CGI::App 3.2 will be formally released. :) To that end, I have a prepared a proposed release, with the help of several others. It's here: http://mark.stosberg.com/perl/CGI-Application-3.2_mls5.tar.gz Downloaded it. Looking at it now!

RE: [cgiapp] CGI::App 3.2_mls5 available

2004-01-05 Thread Jesse Erlbaum
Hi Michael, Mark -- I would like to revive an idea that presented a while back concerning a 'delete' method very similar to CGI's delete method. It would simply remove something from the internal '__PARAMS' hash. A simple implementation could be as follows... sub delete { my

Re: [cgiapp] CGI::App 3.2_mls5 available

2004-01-05 Thread Brett Sanger
I would like to revive an idea that presented a while back concerning a 'delete' method very similar to CGI's delete method. It would simply remove ... It's a backward compatible change that shouldn't break any one's code. Right ..Except for anyone who has implemented subclasses that have a

[cgiapp] Re: CGI::App 3.2_mls5 available

2004-01-05 Thread Mark Stosberg
On 2004-01-05, Brett Sanger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would like to revive an idea that presented a while back concerning a 'delete' method very similar to CGI's delete method. It would simply remove ... It's a backward compatible change that shouldn't break any one's code. Right ..Except

[cgiapp] Re: CGI::App 3.2_mls5 available

2004-01-05 Thread Mark Stosberg
On 2004-01-05, petersm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jesse Erlbaum my only strong consideration is that you do not call it delete() -- too common. My only beef with not calling it delete() is that it is exactly what CGI calls it. You add with param() and you delete with delete(). ALmost

Re: [cgiapp] CGI::App 3.2_mls5 available

2004-01-05 Thread Brian . T . Wightman
I would like to revive an idea that presented a while back concerning a 'delete' method very similar to CGI's delete method. It would simply remove ... It's a backward compatible change that shouldn't break any one's code. Right ..Except for anyone who has implemented subclasses that

Re: [cgiapp] Re: CGI::App 3.2_mls5 available

2004-01-05 Thread Brett Sanger
Would this really be a conflict? It was my understanding that if a method exists in a super-class and a sub-class, the sub-class method would be tried first. Thus, the sub-class would keep working as before. It would be a conflict if any CGI::App code calls delete. So no, no initial conflict.

Re: [cgiapp] Re: CGI::App 3.2_mls5 available

2004-01-05 Thread petersm
Ok, so here are my proposed changes... --- CGI-Application-3.2_mls5/lib/CGI/Application.pm 2004-01-03 19:55:32.0 -0600 +++ Application.pm 2004-01-05 11:00:25.0 -0600 @@ -470,6 +470,17 @@ } +sub delete { +my $self = shift; +my ($param) = @_; +