Re: Mason + FastCGI

On 2009/10/01, at 14:07, Hans Dieter Pearcey wrote:

> Excerpts from Jonathan Swartz's message of Thu Oct 01 08:45:33 -0400  
> 2009:
>> Catalyst will add *something* to memory footprint, startup time, and
>> per-request execution time, no matter how lightly you are using its
>> features. It doesn't exactly seem like a ::Tiny module.
>
> I'm going to assume your straw man is unintentional: I didn't say  
> Catalyst was
> free, I said I thought that using it just for the HTTP abstraction  
> would not
> pull in tons of extra baggage (and so the development time saved  
> would be worth
> it to me).

Not pull extra baggage? :) My personal Cat cost is mostly zero, given  
that my models already use Moose, but compared to other alternatives,  
it is extra baggage already.

My current HandlerFastCGI is 20 lines of code...


> Preferring PSGI to Catalyst for that seems reasonable to me.   
> Putting more
> effort into fastcgi for Mason doesn't, but it's the OP's time, not  
> mine.

+1. If it becomes stable enough and doesn't get over-engineered, PSGI  
will be interesting to me.

Until then, I'll stick with what I can find on CPAN and help out on  
HandlerPSGI as I can.

Bye


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA
is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your
developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay 
ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf