Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
There's more than one way to do things
 
PerlMonks  

Re^2: Right tool for the job?

by davidrw (Prior)
on Sep 25, 2005 at 00:37 UTC ( #494824=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re: Right tool for the job?
in thread Right tool for the job?

Often enough, the right tool is the one you know because you know it.
Unfortunately, there's often other considerations ... think about maintenance -- if for example you're asked to add feature X to a client's IIS/ASP web site, you probably don't want to choose perl (and TT or whatever) (or mysql/postgres vs their existing SQLServer) even though it might be very easy and fast to write, because they won't have any ability to maintain it and it will take a decent amount of installation/configuration to put those tools in place to begin with. (and yes, you spend the whole time cursing vbscript, but it's about the client & solution, not being able to always use the most fun language)

Ever seen QT bindings for awk? Think you could create an Excel report from data in an MS SQL-Server DB using csh?
Those are dangerous questions w/this audience -- someone is liable to go do it for fun ;)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Right tool for the job?
by sauoq (Abbot) on Sep 25, 2005 at 01:19 UTC
    Unfortunately, there's often other considerations ...

    Well, yes... which is why I went on to say: "Of course, there are problems where the tool does matter (which you are well aware of as evidenced by your assertion that you wouldn't use Perl to write an OS kernel.) But they usually aren't that hard to recognize."

    I didn't mean to imply that performance was the only other consideration, by the way. Or even that the only considerations are technical. More often than not it comes down to politics and culture.

    -sauoq
    "My two cents aren't worth a dime.";
    

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://494824]
help
Chatterbox?
[Corion]: 5.14 is also a good target, widely available and fairly stable. Also, over five years old, which doesn't push people into a needless upgrade cycle
[Discipulus]: yes I saw your efforts Corion but the pain is worth?
[Corion]: Discipulus: IMO it's not that much pain, but most of the systems I use have a Perl 5.14 or newer on them nowadays
[marto]: the question is more, is Padre still the way new users should be directed?
[Discipulus]: ah ah I have all 5.26 atm but I play alone..
[Corion]: Except this RHEL box, which comes with Perl 5.10.1 , but there I installed my own 5.20.3 for the real Perl programs we run ;)
[Corion]: marto: I used Padre for some time but then switched to Notepad++, since all the funky features I wanted to put into Padre couldn't be made to work, and/or I lost interest :)
[Discipulus]: indeed marto I dunno. I tested once and many years ago. But I'm not the programmer yardstick. I try to install Padre via cpan now just to add a line about it in the issue. Strawberryperl all life long!
[marto]: yeah, when I worked on Windows I did use Np++ all the time

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others contemplating the Monastery: (11)
As of 2018-06-25 08:51 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?
    Should cpanminus be part of the standard Perl release?



    Results (126 votes). Check out past polls.

    Notices?