From: "Chris Nandor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Well, Perl is the only language with built-in data checking for
> tainted data, as Brent said. Java DOES have some more-or-less
> built-in checks for downloading data from trusted sources, which Perl
> does not have (the apparently abandonded Penguin project was to be
> used for this). But since Perl will not be used on the client side
> anyway, this is not somewhere Perl would be used.
Client side Perl is coming. ActiveState is building a Perl plugin for
Visual Studio that will give a GUI for developers and a good starting point
for Perl developers. Perl without a command line interface? Easily. Many
useful background and Internet aware tasks can be done using Perl code two
orders of magnitude smaller than the present programs. Some tools are
already available to turn VB interfaces into Win32-GUI and you can run Perl
code from VB programs too.
One snake in the garden, however. ActiveState is also doing Python.
And Python is may be more secure than Perl. The following is from another
list, we were talking about security and capabilities.
> Any language with a construct like eval(), or with certain other
> flexible and powerful constructs, allows reference "forging".
.......
> In-process, same reference namespace? Now finally we have a problem :)
> Now worst-case, we have to disable the language constructs that create
> the forged reference problem. In perl this would be vastly damaging,
> but in say python, there is an "rexec" facility that cleanly removes the
> unsafe constructs.
Issues like trusted downloads and security will have to be addressed (I
don't really know enough about it to comment). But aside from this another
concern came up on slashdot....
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=00/06/08/179246&mode=nested
> but imagine the PR when some luser writes a virus in perl to attack win32
Ouch!
But anyway Desktop Perl is coming, Madeline, so that's one place to keep
an eye on. BTW, is O'Reilly doing translations? Chinese? Hindi?
More stuff here with some impressive volume, BT!
http://bangkokwizard.com/perlpraise.html
From: "Brent Michalski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Maybe we should come up with a catchy name for modules...
> Hmmm... Camel droppings, no - that would never catch on...
Problem is that it *would* (I think a quirky sense of humor is a Perl
Requirement). The managers wouldn't like it though :-)
Perl maybe needs some full time fluff writers. The Java piece is just
fluff and is properly countered by more fluff. Run a fluff contest or
something. :-))
Rob
