On Tue, 25 Mar 2003, Stas Bekman wrote:
> Lincoln Stein wrote:
> >>How about making CGI.pm a subclass of $r? (optionally of course, by
> >>dynamically changing @ISA), so instead of returning $q it'll return $r,
> >>after re-blessing it.
> >
> >
> > Sounds interesting. What would be the advantage of that?
>
> The advantage is that
> - you don't have to keep around two instances: $r and $q.
> - assuming that CGI.pm-specific code is not used one can transparently switch
> between Apache::Request and CGI.pm, by just changing:
>
> $r = Apache::Request->new($r);
> $r = CGI->new($r);
>
> And of course Apache::Request is a subclass of Apache ($r) and it works pretty
> well.
>
> In the future I can see someone extending Apache::Request to handle CGI.pm's
> HTML generation in C, so the two could be replace each other.
I sure hope not! I second John Siracusa's post on this. Keep the HTML generation well
away from request parsing, please!
- nick
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Nick Tonkin {|8^)>
