4 ms·

I'm not sure what gave you the idea that just because Mojolicious is Perl, it would have "a pile of corner cases" while a "simple nodejs app" wouldn't. Mojolici

by Grinnz 7y ago

I'm not sure what gave you the idea that just because Mojolicious is Perl, it would have "a pile of corner cases" while a "simple nodejs app" wouldn't. Mojolicious is built from the ground up to be effortlessly asynchronous and performant and handle all common needs. Don't punish it for the horrible CGI.pm that has been removed from core Perl. Yes, Perl's threading support is terrible, and I do wish it was as effortless as in Raku. But you'd be surprised how often you actually only need an event loop and non-blocking implementations, and for the rest of the time there's Mojo::IOLoop->subprocess or IO::Async::Function to provide a thread-like model with efficient forking.

notyourday 7y ago
> I'm not sure what gave you the idea that just because Mojolicious is Perl, it would have "a pile of corner cases" while a "simple nodejs app" wouldn't. Mojolicious is built from the ground up to be effortlessly asynchronous and performant and handle all common needs. Don't punish it for the horrible CGI.pm that has been removed from core Perl Because there have not been million people with different levels of skills poking and prodding Mojolicious into good, bad, ridiculous, disgusting, ugly and beautiful uses, posting on Stackoverflow, getting answers, getting smacked down, or getting those things marked as known bugs. I use code to achieve a business objective, not to create a beautiful code or use a wonderful framework. Just framework itself is not enough - it needs to have skeletons for services that would handle common edge cases -- database failures with automated switch to standby, internal request queues with retries, configurable. Clean interface to external configurations that should be changeable in-flight without a restart; patterns for interfacing with other systems, etc. > Yes, Perl's threading support is terrible, Some of the basic crypto modules and modules that use those basic crypto modules are not thread safe. In 2019. Modules that were written a decade ago. I'm not interested in figuring out those bugs in production. I wrote a pretty complex API using Dancer. I'm not going there again.
- Grinnz 7y ago
  Okay, I see. You should use what most easily provides the features you want, to be sure, and it certainly has not been battle tested the way, say, Catalyst has. But I think you are still selling it short. Mojolicious is foremost about consistency and practicality, beauty (if you would consider it that) is simply a side effect; and it is probably in more use than you think.

by Grinnz 7y ago

notyourday 7y ago

> I'm not sure what gave you the idea that just because Mojolicious is Perl, it would have "a pile of corner cases" while a "simple nodejs app" wouldn't. Mojolicious is built from the ground up to be effortlessly asynchronous and performant and handle all common needs. Don't punish it for the horrible CGI.pm that has been removed from core Perl Because there have not been million people with different levels of skills poking and prodding Mojolicious into good, bad, ridiculous, disgusting, ugly and beautiful uses, posting on Stackoverflow, getting answers, getting smacked down, or getting those things marked as known bugs. I use code to achieve a business objective, not to create a beautiful code or use a wonderful framework. Just framework itself is not enough - it needs to have skeletons for services that would handle common edge cases -- database failures with automated switch to standby, internal request queues with retries, configurable. Clean interface to external configurations that should be changeable in-flight without a restart; patterns for interfacing with other systems, etc. > Yes, Perl's threading support is terrible, Some of the basic crypto modules and modules that use those basic crypto modules are not thread safe. In 2019. Modules that were written a decade ago. I'm not interested in figuring out those bugs in production. I wrote a pretty complex API using Dancer. I'm not going there again.

Grinnz 7y ago
Okay, I see. You should use what most easily provides the features you want, to be sure, and it certainly has not been battle tested the way, say, Catalyst has. But I think you are still selling it short. Mojolicious is foremost about consistency and practicality, beauty (if you would consider it that) is simply a side effect; and it is probably in more use than you think.