From: Jeff Garland (jeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-04-22 21:51:29
Darren Garvey wrote:
> Hi Martin,
>> This makes more sense than supporting a single document format. However,
>> I think it's also beyond the scope of a CGI library. A template engine
>> could be useful in non-web applications as well; so it should not get
>> coupled with a protocol engine, either.
> Jeff Garland sent me a link ( http://tinyurl.com/6v5vx ) which mentioned a
> need for html/xml/soap stream formatting libraries too. The best I can do
> for now is to make the library c++-stream and Boost.Iostreams compatible,
> and wait for the other libraries to come around.
Just to clarify my point....I was suggesting that *I* wanted to see a cgi
library and a separate libs for formatting html/xml/soap data. At the time I
sent the link I was simply pointing out that some of us would like to see a
C++ CGI library as one of several libraries that would support web
development. Personally I don't see any reason why the SoC project has to do
anything with streams for output -- stringstream is able to do all that's
needed for now.
That said, I'd like to see the cgi library provide support for cookie and
session handling. That seems more in scope to me than worrying about html
output like perl::cgi does. Oh, and I'd agree that support for a file upload
is a good use case that should be supported.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk