10 ms·
I suppose you might want to use CGI.pm for some low level stuff but I find I can still get most of what I need by copy and pasting stuff from Matt's CGI scripts
by jayvanguard 11y ago
I suppose you might want to use CGI.pm for some low level stuff but I find I can still get most of what I need by copy and pasting stuff from Matt's CGI scripts (http://www.scriptarchive.com/ http://www.scriptarchive.com/).
- jasonjayr 11y agoConsider using the "Not Matt's Script" versions (http://nms-cgi.sourceforge.net/news.html http://nms-cgi.sourceforge.net/news.html), but even that was last updated 2004. MSA was notorious for very bad examples of old-style perl, and there are much better ways of doing perl nowadays. For a much more modern approach, use Plack/PSGI, and one of the many frameworks built using it.
- davorg 11y agoThe really galling thing is that Matt's scripts will continue to work find in this post-CGI world. The nms versions were written to the best practices of 2000 and therefore need CGI.pm.
- justinator 11y agoActually Matt's stuff DOESN'T use CGI.pm (at least what I'm familiar with). That was the thing - even when CGI.pm was the Better Practice, Matt didn't use it. No one should use Matt's stuff, unless you want huge security exploits.
- davorg 11y ago> Actually Matt's stuff DOESN'T use CGI.pm Yes. That's the point I was making.
- ugexe 11y agoPlease don't promote matts script archive. It is responsible for tons of terrible, out dated perl code due to its (previously) high search ranking.
- jayvanguard 11y agoI thought this was well known enough everyone would get the joke. In fact, I was surprised to see Matt's scripts were still kicking around on a website other than the wayback archive.
- bigiain 11y agoI laughed. (I came to make a cgi-lib.pl compatibility mode gag, but your joke was better...)
- btilly 11y agoI really, really hope that this is simply a joke in bad taste. Mind you, Matt's CGI scripts are no worse than a lot of PHP that is floating around these days...