soapbox
Ok, I've been watching the list for most of the day and watching
bashing of PHP (which IMHO is idiotic and immature but again, JMHO).
I have ALWAYS said, use the right tool for the right job.
PHP has it's place. IMNSHO, it's place is web interfaces. It's GOOD at
that. That's what it
It is now clear that the article is no longer available so I can't
have first hand information. But the listings on the subject is
clear what the issue is all about. In this part of the world where
open source software is yet to make its impact, the language war
does a lot of damage to our cause
On Fri, Oct 18, 2002 at 05:05:47PM +0100, Jeff AA wrote:
- I get
The requested story: 19716 has not been published (set live) yet.
when I visit http://www.newsfactor.com/perl/story/19716.html
Do you think the lists comments upset someone? 8-)
It better have. I'm sure the php
soapbox
Ok, I've been watching the list for most of the day and watching
bashing of PHP (which IMHO is idiotic and immature but again, JMHO).
I have ALWAYS said, use the right tool for the right job.
PHP has it's place. IMNSHO, it's place is web interfaces. It's GOOD at
that. That's what it
On Fri, 2002-10-18 at 17:46, Tobyn Baugher wrote:
As someone fairly new to mod_perl could you make a suggestion of a good
alternative to Apache::Cookie? I was using it just because, like
Apache::Request, it was *there*.
The pure-perl CGI::Cookie works fine.
Chris
--
Chris Winters ([EMAIL
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Btw when I mean escalate, i mean that the odds of any browser getting
a segfaulting page were increased, not that they are random - a
particular request - URI,User-Agent,Accept,Cookie, etc combo -
consistently segfaults, at least for a few days.
Then it's probably
Chris Winters wrote:
On Fri, 2002-10-18 at 17:46, Tobyn Baugher wrote:
As someone fairly new to mod_perl could you make a suggestion of a good
alternative to Apache::Cookie? I was using it just because, like
Apache::Request, it was *there*.
The pure-perl CGI::Cookie works fine.
List,
http://www.newsfactor.com/perl/story/19716.html
...sigh?
Ric
odd yes, they are up to date it seems
head('http://www.newsfactor.com/perl/story/19716.html')
returns:
Apache/1.3.26 (Unix) PHP/4.2.2 mod_perl/1.27
bad article BTW IMHO
./allan
Quoting Richard Clarke [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
List,
http://www.newsfactor.com/perl/story/19716.html
...sigh?
Richard == Richard Clarke [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Richard List,
Richard http://www.newsfactor.com/perl/story/19716.html
Richard ...sigh?
mod_perl is still in the bucket of clues that they didn't dip in to.
--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
allan == allan juul [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
allan odd yes, they are up to date it seems
allan head('http://www.newsfactor.com/perl/story/19716.html')
allan returns:
allan Apache/1.3.26 (Unix) PHP/4.2.2 mod_perl/1.27
allan bad article BTW IMHO
allan ./allan
Heh. They really *don't*
What do you expect from (PHP) amateurs? Apparently Perl is too
complicated for them to comprehend,
never mind mod_perl.
Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
allan == allan juul [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
allan odd yes, they are up to date it seems
allan
Dzuy == Dzuy Nguyen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Dzuy What do you expect from (PHP) amateurs? Apparently Perl is too
Dzuy complicated for them to comprehend,
Dzuy never mind mod_perl.
And according to my thread at use.perl
http://use.perl.org/~merlyn/journal/8445, the article just got pulled!
--
- I get
The requested story: 19716 has not been published (set live) yet.
when I visit http://www.newsfactor.com/perl/story/19716.html
Do you think the lists comments upset someone? 8-)
based on the article, i am surprised that anyone at newsfactor would get the
objections, much less remove the article.
-Original Message-
From: Jeff AA [mailto:jaa.perl;aquabolt.com]
Sent: Friday, October 18, 2002 12:06 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [OT] Perl vs. PHP
Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
Dzuy What do you expect from (PHP) amateurs? Apparently Perl is too
Dzuy complicated for them to comprehend,
Dzuy never mind mod_perl.
And according to my thread at use.perl
http://use.perl.org/~merlyn/journal/8445, the article just got pulled!
The article says PHP
Hey All -
based on the article, i am surprised that anyone at newsfactor
would get the
objections, much less remove the article.
After scanning a few NewsFactor (Factory?) articles, particularly those
written by Mike Martin, it's pretty clear that they have a successful
Internet business
]
cc:
Subject:Re: [OT] Perl vs. PHP. but where is mod_perl?
Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
Dzuy What do you expect from (PHP) amateurs? Apparently Perl is too
Dzuy complicated for them to comprehend,
Dzuy never mind mod_perl.
And according to my thread at use.perl
http
jjore == jjore [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
jjore If you completely left CPAN out of the picture then just as a
jjore language and syntax it isn't all that nice anyway. *shrugs*
jjore I've yet to understand what the appeal is.
PHP is just barely limited enough that an ISP can leave it enabled
PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject:Re: [OT] Perl vs. PHP. but where is mod_perl?
Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
Dzuy What do you expect from (PHP) amateurs? Apparently Perl is too
Dzuy complicated for them to comprehend,
Dzuy never mind mod_perl.
And according to my thread
PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Cory 'G' Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 18, 2002 1:47 PM
Subject: Re: [OT] Perl vs. PHP. but where is mod_perl?
Hi,
I am always happy to join into some PHP bashing. :) I feel the same way
as
you. I even tried to like PHP
Whoa guys, we do actually have somewhat of a clue over here. That piece
was a mistake (for the same reasons all of you took issue with) and was
pulled as soon as I explained the problems with it (and before I'd ever
seen any of the comments on list).
The url to the story, and most of our site,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is a bug introduced by having to insert workarounds for segfaults
caused by Apache::Cooke/mod_perl. I've been asking for help with this
issue for off and on for months now.
I suggest you stop using Apache::Cookie and see if the segfaults go
away. There are pure
Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
What confuses me is how anyone with a *programming* background admires
PHP over Perl, or can say that Perl doesn't scale or PHP is better
for large web sites. Obviously, they're comparing Perl-CGI with
PHP, not mod_perl/$templating_system with PHP, which would be a much
On Fri, Oct 18, 2002 at 03:26:17PM -0400, Perrin Harkins wrote:
I suggest you stop using Apache::Cookie and see if the segfaults go
away. There are pure Perl modules that handle cookies well, and it's
not an expensive operation. Apache::Cookie is probably overkill in most
situations.
As
Perrin Harkins wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is a bug introduced by having to insert workarounds for segfaults
caused by Apache::Cooke/mod_perl. I've been asking for help with this
issue for off and on for months now.
I suggest you stop using Apache::Cookie and see if the segfaults
26 matches
Mail list logo
