Re: [OT] Lightweight CGI.pm - Why?

2001-05-19 Thread Gunther Birznieks
The reason I have used them in the past is that it is easier to do things like widgets. TT and many pure template systems don't seem to have as much of a widget concept when it comes to form variables. It's nice to know that if you print a radio button form element using CGI.pm, that if the va

[OT] Lightweight CGI.pm - Why?

2001-05-19 Thread Larry Leszczynski
Hi all - Just curious because it seems to come up a lot - for what applications have people run into a serious need for HTML generators ala CGI.pm? (I'm not talking about templating systems, there's obvious need and practical use for those.) It seems like people like to use the HTML generating

Have SSIs return the error status if include dies

2001-05-19 Thread Joachim Zobel
Hi. I would like my SSIs to return the error status if an included request dies. A better error message would be nice, too. Is there a trick to do this? Thanx, Joachim -- "... ein Geschlecht erfinderischer Zwerge, die fuer alles gemietet werden koennen."- Bertolt Br

Re: Lightweight CGI.pm for PerlHandlers

2001-05-19 Thread Bill Moseley
At 11:28 PM 05/18/01 -0400, Neil Conway wrote: >Is there a simple (fast, light) module that generates HTML >in a similar style to CGI.pm, for use with mod_perl? Well, not in the style similar to CGI.pm, but how about a here doc -- if it's that simple. >At the moment, I'd rather not move to a sys

Re: Lightweight CGI.pm for PerlHandlers

2001-05-19 Thread barries
On Fri, May 18, 2001 at 11:28:06PM -0400, Neil Conway wrote: > > Is there a simple (fast, light) module that generates HTML > in a similar style to CGI.pm, for use with mod_perl? You can check out HTML::EasyTags[1] and HTML::TagMaker[2]. They're all kinda heavyweight, the first requires OO ($htm