Paul Rogers [CE] wrote:
> Tim Meadowcroft wrote:
> > ASP is an environment, pick your language to go with it (I
> > use Perl). So ASP versus Perl is meaningless, but "ASP and
> > Perl" vs "mod_perl" is a valid comparison.
>
> au contraire, mon frere. .pl vs .asp is a perfectly valid
> comparison. in tests, there is often little difference between
> .asp's using vbscript vs .asp's using perlscript or javascript.
> but usually there are significant differences between straight
> .pl's (out-of-process) and .asp's, particularly at high
> concurrent user levels (for obvious reasons).
But as Tim wrote (whose attribution you snipped, btw), comparing just "ASP"
and "Perl" is a bit like asking the question, "should I develop my script in
Perl or should I use Unix?". Particularly so since you can use Perl with
ASP; so then "comparing" them is meaningless. Like comparing apples with
baskets.
So "ASP and Perl" (environment + language) vs. "mod_perl" (environment +
language) is OK. "ASP and VBScript" (environment + language) vs. "CGI +
Perl" (environment + language) is also OK. But "ASP" (environment) vs.
"Perl" (language) is meaningless.
What you called "straight .pl's" isn't just a bare Perl script either -- you
have to have a CGI connection to make any use of it. So you have the CGI
environment and a Perl interpreter being started for each request, etc. But
then you're comparing "ASP + <insert language here>" and "CGI + <insert
language here>", not "ASP" and "<insert language here>".
Cheers,
Philip
---
You are currently subscribed to perl-win32-users as: [archive@jab.org]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For non-automated Mailing List support, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
