The only thing worse than having to respond to such misinformation about Perl is having to read it in the first place, barely refuted, right here on Perlmonks. It's right down there with you guys chastizing me for simply answering the propaganda campaign against Perl, right here on Perlmonks again. I felt compelled to because every point in the article contradicts my everyday experience with Perl, and it continues to be the 3rd result on Google for PHP Perl Comparison.
in reply to Re: Why they choose to lie about PHP over Perl
in thread Why they choose to lie about PHP over Perl
Lies of Society joined Perlmonks 2 days ago and after initially agreeing with me proceeded to make the following refuted assertions on this very thread, draw your own conclusions:
There is a campaign of lies against Perl, right here on Perlmonks, and we should oppose the misinformation with facts, otherwise it spreads and takes hold, as it already seems to have done in the minds of many web developers.
- mod_perl needs its own server
- old, inefficient CGI
- PHP will remain the best
- massive performance hit (in unlikely situations)
- Few people run PHP under CGI
- PHP Apache module ... does not have the same security considerations (for an ISP) that mod_perl does.
- mod_perl is too dangerous for web hosts to offer
- If it were safe and easy to install like mod_php
- PHP will remain the best choice
"This almost identical phrase seems to crop all over the place, with no attribution or supporting evidence as if it is absolutely the case with no possibility of mitigation. It would sound less like some third party cargo-FUD if some example or documentation were provided to be honest."-gellyfish