CGI_Lite vs. CGI::Simple

I just tested it, and for the very minor use that I'm putting it to CGI::Simple is actually slower than CGI.pm. I'm a little bit boggled by this result, but I guess it's just a matter of the particular functions I'm using. CGI_Lite, on the other hand, gives about a 60% speed increase in the overall execution time of the script.

Comment on CGI_Lite vs. CGI::Simple

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: CGI_Lite vs. CGI::Simple by tachyon (Chancellor) on Sep 18, 2002 at 22:57 UTC
I would like to see your code as all the testing I did showed that CGI::Simple was quite a bit faster than CGI across the board. I too am boggled. cheers tachyon s&&rsenoyhcatreve&&&s&n.+t&"$'$`$\"$\&"&ee&&y&srve&&d&&print	[reply]
Re: Re: CGI_Lite vs. CGI::Simple by perrin (Chancellor) on Sep 19, 2002 at 13:34 UTC
All it does is load CGI_Lite and parse cookies. Nothing else.	[reply]
Re: Re: Re: CGI_Lite vs. CGI::Simple by tachyon (Chancellor) on Sep 19, 2002 at 19:31 UTC
If that's all you need why not call CGI::Cookie or CGI::Simple::Cookie directly? You don't need to call CGI/CGI::Simple at all as these modules have their own APIs.... `use CGI::Cookie; use Data::Dumper; my %cookies = fetch CGI::Cookie; print "Content-type: text/html\n\n", Dumper \%cookies;` [download] cheers tachyon s&&rsenoyhcatreve&&&s&n.+t&"$'$`$\"$\&"&ee&&y&srve&&d&&print	[reply] [d/l]
Re: Re: Re: Re: CGI_Lite vs. CGI::Simple by perrin (Chancellor) on Sep 19, 2002 at 20:35 UTC


The stupid question is the question not asked
	PerlMonks