On Saturday 29 December 2007 13:35:00 Mark J. Reed wrote:
> Ok, consider me duly chastised. Sorry for the sidetracking.
It's not a *bad* idea, but it's less important in my mind than getting useful
information on the wiki. Anyone who wants to pursue it can do so, but I'd
like to forestall a l
Ok, consider me duly chastised. Sorry for the sidetracking.
On 12/29/07, chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Saturday 29 December 2007 06:56:45 Mark J. Reed wrote:
>
> > Maybe it's just me, but it
> > seems like it will just feed the all-too-common perception that Perl
> > is for CGI scrip
On Saturday 29 December 2007 06:56:45 Mark J. Reed wrote:
> Maybe it's just me, but it
> seems like it will just feed the all-too-common perception that Perl
> is for CGI scripts, and "real" web apps need to be written in
> something else (be it Java, PHP, Ruby/Rails, whatever).
Proposed new rule
On Dec 29, 2007 4:56 PM, Mark J. Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> .cgi? Is that really a CGI-based implementation? Because that seems
> a little, I don't know, backward-looking. Maybe it's just me, but it
> seems like it will just feed the all-too-common perception that Perl
> is for CGI script
.cgi? Is that really a CGI-based implementation? Because that seems
a little, I don't know, backward-looking. Maybe it's just me, but it
seems like it will just feed the all-too-common perception that Perl
is for CGI scripts, and "real" web apps need to be written in
something else (be it Java,
