On Thursday 12 December 2002 11:35, Paul Kraus wrote: I can think of a few things to say to these comments:
| So its more of a cost justification then it is for functionality. Not for everyone. I will *never* use an m$ product for cgi...ever. Using an m$ product for cgi at this point and time would connotate that I'd be using IIS for my backend. Given that IIS is about the most insecure piece of software that m$ puts out is more than enough for me to justify NOT using anything from m$ in the web dept. For that matter, I strongly believe m$ products are not worth being used for a production server environment. That is just me, though. Im not trying to start flames, Im just expressing my nsho. But I've worked with *nix and windows as an admin for about 6 years now in semi-big to big production environments and we have *always* without fail had *way* more problems with m$ products than with *nix and that's not counting security. | It seem Perl and cgi would generate a greater overhead. Im not exactly sure why you would think this. I suppose using Perl with an m$ product this might be true if there is no way of integrating the intpretter in with the server (like a mod_perl for IIS), however, with the stuff you can do with .NET and Active Perl I'd think this would be lessened. Mind you its been a few years since I've had to deal with a windows server and I no NOTHING about .Net other than some things I've read so I could be in error. | I have no lover of Microsoft but in my business I have to choose the right | tool not necessarily the "Moral" tool :) Now see, believe it or not, this is the one thing you stated that made ask one question... If you don't stick to your morals then what do you have? :) What exactly is the "right" tool? Sometimes, that is really easy to answer. But most of the time the answer to that question is which tool can get the job done? Now, of course, barring any other stipulations to that one question, technically, just about any tool suited for the job can get the job done. :) I degress. I am bias toward Perl for a lot of things but when it comes to webdev stuff I usually prefer PHP with Perl in a very close second place. There was one point where I would have stated hands down and in no other circumstances that PHP was always the best for webdev. However, now, I would have to say that Perl is just as good as PHP in the webdev dept and in some cases maybe a little better and in some cases not. *shrug* how 'bout that for ambiguity... =] - Jim | | > -----Original Message----- | > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] | > Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 11:28 AM | > To: Paul Kraus; Perl | > Subject: RE: Perl Cgi/ Why? | > | > | > Possibly better asked to beginners-cgi, but in any case. | > | > ASP -> $$, M$ (and not just that it is an evil empire ;-), | > but portability) MONO -> vaporware Sun -> $$, apples and oranges? | > | > I am sure I will right a <soapbox> on this later, but for now | > those seem like 3 good quick reasons. | | http://danconia.org | | ------------------------------------------------ | On Thu, 12 Dec 2002 11:07:46 -0500, "Paul Kraus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | | wrote: | > With ASP.net, MONO, and sun implication why would someone still use | > Perl for website design. This is not a flame but simply asking for | > advice. I use Perl for reports and linux/unix/windows scripting. | > However what is to gain by using it for the web over these other | > technologies? What are some of the things you guys use Perl to | > accomplish with your website and why do you use Perl? | > | > | > | > Paul Kraus | > Network Administrator | > PEL Supply Company | > 216.267.5775 Voice | > 216-267-6176 Fax | > www.pelsupply.com -- - Jim - '94 MKIV TT auto - '90 MKIII T manual -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
