I would like to thank everyone for the very useful information. I have gotten everything to work well. Also, the diverse views have given me more options to try.
I am new to this 'web thing', having done system level programming for over 30 years. I am trying to learn the various strategies and the strengths/weaknesses of the various technologies. I am currently implementing a small-ish project for myself and will explore using PHP and then PHP/Drupal on this project. I would really appreciate it if people would comment on their views of these differing technologies, what project types they are appropriate for and their experiences with them or tell me where I can find these discussions on the web. I can see some differences but until you have worked with them on a large project it is really difficult to know the pitfalls. Please feel free to email me directly rather than the full email list. Again, thank you for your help! Chuck On Sat, 2009-09-26 at 00:15 +0800, 叶孤城 wrote: > 2009/9/26 Bruce Johnson <john...@pharmacy.arizona.edu>: > > > > > or just print the html. When executed as a cgi script, the outgoing > > connection from Apache is the script's stdout. Variables substitute just > > fine. > > > > print <<EOF; > > Content-type: text/html\n\n > > <html> > > <link rel="stylesheet" href="./dynamic.css" type="text/css" > > <title>Howdy $username!</title> > > ... > > </html> > > EOF > > > > Works for us. > > > > This way I can do large swaths of straight html code without any issue, and > > no potential complications from added modules. > > > > printing html directly in CGI scripts is maybe convenient for a small > application. > but, its maintainability is worse when the project is increasing. > I may think also using a template is better, that make perl code > separated from front-end codes (html/js/css etc), and make both perl > programmer and designer happy. > I personally prefer Template::Toolkit for CGI and Mason for mod_perl. > > //yegucheng
