Re: Mason + FastCGI

Pedro, Hans et al.,

Hi guys, I am excited to see traffic here.   Pedro, I first read of  
your work when looking at AnyEvent, then Mojo.   I'm curious if you'd  
use Mason with Mojo, but if this is all painfully OT I'd be happy to  
move off list, maybe to the mason-users list.    This discussion could  
be germane as an offshoot of the Mason 2.0: Mason::Template and  
Mason::Framework topics?

I'd love to see a separate interop page on the wiki, too, with  
examples and/or pointers to apps using Mason underneath another  
framework.   I got into Mason via Bricolage, where I came to love the  
autohandler and dhandler world of Mason, as well as templating in perl  
and not a separate templating language.   The new decades are steering  
me toward keeping Mason around but trying other frameworks for various  
situations.    I'm not sure how much of Mason gets lost/improved on/ 
etc with Cat and/or Mojo using Mason.

Cheers,
Mike


On Oct 1, 2009, at 8:45 AM, Jonathan Swartz wrote:

>
> On Oct 1, 2009, at 5:09 AM, Hans Dieter Pearcey wrote:
>
>> Excerpts from Pedro Melo's message of Thu Oct 01 02:55:28 -0400 2009:
>>>> OK; then why not use only what you need?  It'd be trivial to write
>>>> an app whose
>>>> Controller::Root had a single action (at /, with any number of  
>>>> args)
>>>> that
>>>> handed off to a Mason view to do the real work.  You get fastcgi  
>>>> and
>>>> the
>>>> standalone server for free AND the Mason component reloading that
>>>> you enjoy so
>>>> much.
>>>
>>> That would work, but isn't that a bit extreme? Use the entire Cat
>>> stack just to get FastCGI?
>>
>> * FastCGI
>> * standalone dev server
>> * futureproofing
>>
>> I don't understand saying "the entire Cat stack".  It's not like I'm
>> pulling in
>> a session module and an ORM and a form builder and a twitter client
>> -- it's
>> just a HTTP abstraction and a URI dispatcher[1].  If we were talking
>> about
>> Jifty I might get where you're coming from.
>>
>> hdp.
>>
>> 1. OK, it's also a logger and some debug stuff.  Those both
>> lightweight and
>> worth it to me anyway.
>
> 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 haven't
> benchmarked to see what this is over straight Mason.
>
> Hans, feel like doing a quick benchmark since you already clearly have
> Catalyst installed? :)
>
> Jon
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> _______________________________________________
> Mason-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mason-devel


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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