I began some weeks ago to think about translating my .pl scripts (that run with mod_perl 2 ::registry) to perl handlers. My first problem was to find how to include a perl handler as i included my cgi scripts (include virtual). I found that #perl directive allows you to include with Apache::include the same registry scripts, but making it faster. I also note that in fact you could include any perl handler with that #perl directive.
But it seems to be that with modperl as DSO this directive does not work, and that Apache::include is only a modperl1.x funcionality, so discarted in mod perl 2. I have had problems building modperl as a static module. Finally i could build as static module and as DSO module (mod_perl.a and mod_perl.so) but i didn't have modperl enabled without loadmodule mod_perl.so, so static version is not running. Windows binaries are all DSO, and i don't have VB to compile. And i've read that compiling mod_perl statically doesn't allow you to compile other DSO modules after. Then i think, if DSO is the comfortable way to do things (not in practical but in concept), how can i include a perl handler in my HTML page? I know there are modules like MASON or similar, and now i will enter to input and output filters, but comparing with the easiest way of Include virtual registry scripts i begin to think that perl handlers in mod perl lose here against cgi simple scripts. So this is my question. Are perlhandlers better than CGI registry scripts in speed but not in funcionality??? as i think CGI people uses to include their scripts a lot!! ----- Un nuevo buscador más rápido, eficaz y sencillo http://www.plaf.com Ya.com ADSL Home 24h, Módem + Alta + 1 mes Gratis http://acceso.ya.com/adslhome24h/
