Conrad: Good post, very knowledgeable.
I'll borrow this concept as well:
>>Watch the "I thinks" & "I'd bet" because it's just that, not "I have
>>observed" or "I know"
Another point to consider when comparing any to languages is time of
development. Not only the time it takes to code the application, but the
time and labor it takes to continue to manage the application.
I haven't used Perl for a long time, but one of the things I didn't like
about it was the lack of a syntax standard. An application can be developed
in perl using an enormous amount of different styles, this can probably be
said for most languages. The difference I see with Perl is that a given
piece of functionality can be developed with an equally large amount of
syntaxes. Conversely, this can be seen as a benefit to the language - it is
extremely flexible. However, this can become a difficulty when managing an
application that has a team of developers, or even worse, multiple
generations of developers.
ColdFusion is renowned for providing an easy way to develop web apps
quickly. ColdFusion does offer the developer many different styles of
programming an application (Fusebox, etc.); as I said, I think that this
statement rings true for every language. However, the language syntax is
pretty rigidly defined (tag-based). While users can develop overall
applications in many ways, there aren't too many variations as to how they
would program an individual line of code.
With this in mind, I think it is easier for the average CF programmer deduce
how the average CF Application works than it is for the average Perl
programmer in a similar situation.
I'm straying off here...Another thing (please correct me if I'm wrong), I
believe Perl was originally developed as a shell extension (like BATCH to
DOS, but much much better), not as a CGI. This would lead me to believe
that CF better suited to the task.
---
Paul Mone
Ninthlink Consulting Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
619.222.7082
-----Original Message-----
From: Conrad Classen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2001 1:29 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CF vs. Perl
I've used Perl extensively, and agree with some of the things
you say. However, when it comes down pure parsing of information
and the processing of it, there is not anything that I've seen
that can surpass or even equal it.
On the apache front, with Perl being compiled into the daemon,
it will give CF a run for it's money. On the IIS front, with
Perl being used as an ISAPI process, Perl beats CF every time.
The down side of Perl is the non existent support for variables
that are persistent. This however can be simulated by using
methods similar to those used by CF, but requires additional
programming by the Perler.
CF makes this persistent variable memory second nature to CF
programmers, and so with most of the donkey work being cared
for by CF, applications are easier to code.
I will always use Perl where really powerful parsing is required,
since the Perl Regular Expressions (RegEx) beat CF hands down any
day of the week (CF's RegEx leave at lot to be desired), but for
applications I am inclined to favour CF.
In terms of persistent database connections, Perl as an ISAPI
extension will maintain connections, so these have to be specifically
closed each time. Some variable persistence has also been noted,
although invariably not when required.
Conrad
-----Original Message-----
From: another programmer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 18 May 2001 05:28
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: CF vs Perl
Watch the "I thinks" & "I'd bet" because it's just that, not "I have
observed" or "I know"
I think Perl, in the past, would've been frowned upon because the execution
of the perl engine would've been required for every request, but now it's a
part of Apache... if it's compiled as so... which'd lessen the overhead.
(correct me if I'm wrong, I read this awhile ago and my memory isn't so good
anymore ;-)
I'd bet CF would use more resources, generally CF does use more constant
memory resources, because it holds DB connections for applications and
usually session/server/application variables. Perl is unlikely to do so, as
most web application servers frown on holding on to DB connections, because
it's usually the programmers code not the web application servers code that
'hold' the connections, and are usually implemented... in not the best
fashion. However, while it is using more memory, it also gains speed
because of this. Easy application & session management means it's more
likely to be used which'd mean faster access to such resources (shared
information), and the DB connections don't have to be opened/closed all the
time, and can be limited to strict number.
Speed wise, I'd think CF would be quicker if Perl doesn't keep a cache of
requested files...
As for on-request memory, I'd think each request would demand more memory
for Perl... reasoning: the libraries used and the methods Perl programmers
would probably use. <cf_outburst>ie. I'm a guessing idjit, everything I say
is wrong, don't trust a word I say blah! and people (I mean me, not anyone
else) who don't use 2 programming languages at a similar level/usage should
keep their opinions to themselves on comparisons</cf_outburst>
These are just my thoughts, I haven't used Perl in a web environment for
just over a year, and I certainly didn't use it very much. Most of the
companys code was being translated into CF at the time...
I'd like to hear of anyone on this list who actually uses perl (I do, but
rarely) to voice their knowledge... btw is the compiler 'perl' & the
language 'Perl'?
man, i've been hanging out for Perl CD bookshelf second edition for
awhile... my copy is meant to arrive in June according to the bookstore...
hope they're right... I _do_ love Perl, but rarely have the time to use it
at the moment :-(
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2001 5:10 AM
Subject: CF vs Perl
> Hi all. I'm curious what the difference is, resource-wise, between CF
> and Perl for doing stuff like writing to a database, sending out
> simple forms, etc. Does CF use much more of the server's resources?
> Or is it comparable?
>
> Thanks,
> --
>
> Bud Schneehagen - Tropical Web Creations
>
> _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
> ColdFusion Solutions / eCommerce Development
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.twcreations.com/
> 954.721.3452
>
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
