Perrin Harkins wrote: > On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 18:47, Chris Shiflett wrote: > >>Another reason for the naming habits is that PHP runs on more Web servers >>than Apache, and only the Apache SAPI is called mod_php. > > > This is exactly the same situation as Perl. Perl has SAPI support on > IIS through PerlEx, lots more through FastCGI, and runs persistently > with any server that supports CGI via PersistentPerl. (AFAIK, PHP has > no equivalent for that.) This is part of why I think singling out > mod_perl, as opposed to talking about Perl's speed and SAPI support in > general and giving mod_perl as an example, is a questionable tactic. If > you include all of the above groups, you have a lot more friends > (ActiveState) and reference accounts (Amazon.com).
well, I think it really depends on what you want to accomplish. all the above really seems like just a perl versus php (or $web_language) debate: both run on a number of different server platforms, have strong followings, and are proven scalable and "enterprise" (sorry for throwing out that term, but you get the idea :). in the end, arguments like the above are very, very important ones for us as perl programmers, but I don't think they help mod_perl prosper as a technology, which is what I'm interested in :) while I realize I'm in the minority with this view (and perrin and I have had this discussion/friendly disagreement before :) what _I_ like about mod_perl cannot be satisfied by anything other than mod_perl - I like the Apache API, and I would prefer to use it in conjunction with Perl rather than mess around with C (or even something like apache_hooks, since I don't know php :) for those that share a love for this particular aspect of mod_perl and have a desire to see it prosper, nothing else will really do. if mod_perl is just a means to performance ends similar to the other technologies you mention, it would be simpler and more efficient to strip mod_perl down to just an embedded interpreter and support development of just Registry.pm and the minimal API it requires. I think mod_perl more than that, and that is why I feel beaten down when nobody seems to care about mod_perl for what it really is, or people say you can just swap it out for FastCGI or something and things move on. that's when I feel like I'm wasting my time. --Geoff -- Report problems: http://perl.apache.org/bugs/ Mail list info: http://perl.apache.org/maillist/modperl.html List etiquette: http://perl.apache.org/maillist/email-etiquette.html
