> Hope it helps somebody,

Thanks Graham! I really like this idea.  I'll be trying it out shortly (with
FastCGI).

As Martin suggested, plain CGI can be an obvious choice for development, but
for those for whom it doesn't make sense (*) this should really help!



* In my case, I was using CGI, but since I was getting images for my pages
via Quixote a single click could equate to 4, 6, or more, GETs.  Until we
modified how StaticFile browser caching was handled, some of my clicks could
take in the ballpark of 15 seconds to finish loading.  IMO, that crosses the
line of poor performance into the region of "I can't develop like this...",
so I switched to FastCGI, even for dev work.  Now that StaticFiles behave a
bit differently, this probably wouldn't be such an issue anymore.