[hagg3n]

But you did spend time learning unix, nginx, bash, CGI, SQLite, etc.

Sure I can agree these tools are worth learning, I'm just pointing out it's not the same thing. Netlify allows you to setup a static website with data collection, e-mail dispatch and whatnot all without code and much faster.

[efields]

But the customer that needs that is arguably better off on Squarespace. Most modern point-and-click platforms let you build arbitrary forms with mail services.

Netlify wants developers to live and breathe microservices that they meter to developers. In order to get the benefits, you have to change DX, which the entire JAMstack community has been doing for a decade or so. The downside is now putting stuff on the web is often needlessly confusing and forces you to be dependent on a middle man.

[mehdix]

> But you did spend time learning unix, nginx, bash, CGI, SQLite, etc.

True, and it's been a rewarding decision ever since. For a corporate or a community Netlify or similar JAMstack content management systems might make sense, but for a indie developer? I don't think so.

[cutler]

But bash with CGI? Seriously, when there's Perl, Ruby, Python and PHP to choose from? 'Sounds like a security nightmare too.

[mehdix]

Because I wanted to learn more about CGI. Below is the script, I'd appreciate pointing out any weaknesses in it.

https://raw.githubusercontent.com/mehdisadeghi/mehdix.ir/mas...

[cutler]

Although it may work brilliant minds in the Perl community such as Lincoln Stein and Randall Schwartz spent a significant amount of their career in the late 90s hunting down all the edge cases you're probably unaware of and produced CGI.pm. You can still learn a lot about CGI from this module but your exposure to vulns will be that much lower with something tried and tested.