From: Ovid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > --- Guy Hulbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Fri, 2007-12-07 at 15:26 -0600, Jonathan Rockway wrote: > > > BTW, I like the term "failed experiment". Isn't everything a > > "failed > > > experiment"? Should we remove CGI.pm from the CPAN because > > CGI.pm-style > > > code is a "failed experiment" in writing web applications? > > > > Academic thinking again. > > > > CGI is highly successful. > > It's highly successful in the way that COBOL* is highly successful: > for a while it was the main game in town and if you wanted to play, > that's what you played. Now that CGI.pm is old and outdated (even > Lincoln Stein has admitted that he'd write it differently today), we're > largely stuck with it for legacy issues. "Inertia" is not the same > thing "success".
First you need the success to gain some mass and only then can you have any inertia. COBOL WAS successful ... so lots of things were written in it and now there is some inertia because of that. If you live long enough you see every victory turn into defeat, but that doesn't mean it was not a victory originaly. Jenda ===== [EMAIL PROTECTED] === http://Jenda.Krynicky.cz ===== When it comes to wine, women and song, wizards are allowed to get drunk and croon as much as they like. -- Terry Pratchett in Sourcery
