Re: speeding up CGI.pm

2003-03-26 Thread Ask Bjoern Hansen
On Tue, 25 Mar 2003, Stas Bekman wrote:

[...]
  http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=apache-modperlm=95587404903236w=2

 If something can be made faster with very little effort, why not doing that?

Often because the cost of having to deal with the increased
complexity and new obscure bugs isn't worth it.


 - ask

-- 
ask bjoern hansen, http://www.askbjoernhansen.com/ !try; do();


Re: speeding up CGI.pm

2003-03-25 Thread Issac Goldstand
That would be really amazing if it could still be implemented in mp1, too,
as it would allow for interoperability between libapreq-based applications
(like Apache::UploadMeter) and response handlers like CGI scripts which use
CGI.pm  I suppose that this isn't such a big problem in mp2 whose filters
will probably make using one API for request handling unnecessary...

  Issac

- Original Message -
From: Stas Bekman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 1:41 AM
Subject: speeding up CGI.pm


 While we are at the CGI.pm issue, I was thinking that those who stick with
 CGI.pm because of its extended all-in-one functionality (request parsing/
HTML
 generation), but unhappy about request parsing speed, could benefit by
 integrating Apache::Request in CGI.pm to do the request parsing. So if
 Apache::Request is available CGI.pm could re-alias its args(), params(),
etc.
 functions to call Apache::Request functions instead. What do you think?

 __
 Stas BekmanJAm_pH -- Just Another mod_perl Hacker
 http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide --- http://perl.apache.org
 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com
 http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org   http://ticketmaster.com




Re: speeding up CGI.pm

2003-03-25 Thread Lincoln Stein
I like the idea of that, although the handsprings needed to do ordinary CGI, 
mp1 and mp2 might lead to a cloud of confusion.  Best to keep them in 
separate modules and load them into CGI as needed.

Is Apache::Request in mp2 ready for prime time?  We haven't been able to get 
it running here (some sort of install problem, my people tell me).

Lincoln

On Tuesday 25 March 2003 03:25 am, Issac Goldstand wrote:
 That would be really amazing if it could still be implemented in mp1, too,
 as it would allow for interoperability between libapreq-based applications
 (like Apache::UploadMeter) and response handlers like CGI scripts which use
 CGI.pm  I suppose that this isn't such a big problem in mp2 whose filters
 will probably make using one API for request handling unnecessary...

   Issac

 - Original Message -
 From: Stas Bekman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 1:41 AM
 Subject: speeding up CGI.pm

  While we are at the CGI.pm issue, I was thinking that those who stick
  with CGI.pm because of its extended all-in-one functionality (request
  parsing/

 HTML

  generation), but unhappy about request parsing speed, could benefit by
  integrating Apache::Request in CGI.pm to do the request parsing. So if
  Apache::Request is available CGI.pm could re-alias its args(), params(),

 etc.

  functions to call Apache::Request functions instead. What do you think?
 
  __
  Stas BekmanJAm_pH -- Just Another mod_perl Hacker
  http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide --- http://perl.apache.org
  mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com
  http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org   http://ticketmaster.com

-- 

Lincoln D. Stein   Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Cold Spring Harbor, NY




Re: speeding up CGI.pm

2003-03-25 Thread Nick Tonkin
On Tue, 25 Mar 2003, Lincoln Stein wrote:

 I like the idea of that, although the handsprings needed to do ordinary CGI,
 mp1 and mp2 might lead to a cloud of confusion.  Best to keep them in
 separate modules and load them into CGI as needed.

 Is Apache::Request in mp2 ready for prime time?  We haven't been able to get
 it running here (some sort of install problem, my people tell me).

Not at all ready. I do not believe even a beta release has been made.

- nick

-- 


Nick Tonkin   {|8^)



speeding up CGI.pm

2003-03-24 Thread Stas Bekman
While we are at the CGI.pm issue, I was thinking that those who stick with 
CGI.pm because of its extended all-in-one functionality (request parsing/ HTML 
generation), but unhappy about request parsing speed, could benefit by 
integrating Apache::Request in CGI.pm to do the request parsing. So if 
Apache::Request is available CGI.pm could re-alias its args(), params(), etc. 
functions to call Apache::Request functions instead. What do you think?

__
Stas BekmanJAm_pH -- Just Another mod_perl Hacker
http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide --- http://perl.apache.org
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com
http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org   http://ticketmaster.com


Re: speeding up CGI.pm

2003-03-24 Thread Gunther Birznieks
Stas Bekman wrote:

While we are at the CGI.pm issue, I was thinking that those who stick 
with CGI.pm because of its extended all-in-one functionality (request 
parsing/ HTML generation), but unhappy about request parsing speed, 
could benefit by integrating Apache::Request in CGI.pm to do the 
request parsing. So if Apache::Request is available CGI.pm could 
re-alias its args(), params(), etc. functions to call Apache::Request 
functions instead. What do you think?
From an outsider's perspective, I agree.

For some previous discussion (April 16, 2000)

http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=apache-modperlm=95587404903236w=2





Re: speeding up CGI.pm

2003-03-24 Thread Stas Bekman
Gunther Birznieks wrote:
Stas Bekman wrote:

While we are at the CGI.pm issue, I was thinking that those who stick 
with CGI.pm because of its extended all-in-one functionality (request 
parsing/ HTML generation), but unhappy about request parsing speed, 
could benefit by integrating Apache::Request in CGI.pm to do the 
request parsing. So if Apache::Request is available CGI.pm could 
re-alias its args(), params(), etc. functions to call Apache::Request 
functions instead. What do you think?


 From an outsider's perspective, I agree.

For some previous discussion (April 16, 2000)

http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=apache-modperlm=95587404903236w=2
If something can be made faster with very little effort, why not doing that?
Certainly the degree of performance improvement depends on how heavy the 
request parsing is, but you get a better speed overall.

__
Stas BekmanJAm_pH -- Just Another mod_perl Hacker
http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide --- http://perl.apache.org
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com
http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org   http://ticketmaster.com