[Israel.pm] Has anyone compared Win ActiveState Perl to Linux Perl ?
offer.kaye at gmail.com
Sun Nov 14 05:36:42 PST 2004
On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 15:09:03 +0200, Mosh M wrote:
> 1. What problems have you people found with AS Perl?
> 2. How fast is Linux Perl compared with AS Perl?
"Linux Perl" is a meaningless term here. What do you mean? Perl on
Linux could be:
1. The Perl supplied by the distribution vendor. Rarely optimized for
2. A locally compiled Perl, so probably compiled for your specific architecture.
3. A locally compiled Perl, with optimization flags (O2, etc.), so
probably even faster.
4. A locally compiled Perl, with threads/debug/whatever enabled, which
will probably slow it down.
You can't compare oranges to apples...
> 3. How much of CPAN works okay with AS Perl ? what about the PPM
That's the main headache, IMHO. Unless you have a compiler for
Windows, any module that requires compilation will be problematic, to
say the least.
As for the PPM repositories, they are good, but only as long as they
include the package you want. If you want to install a package that
requires compilation and is not in the repository, you're out of
luck... Even if the module doesn't require compilation, you'll still
need make, again a bit of a headcache.
> 4. For people who have used both, which do you prefer, and why?
After trying at home to work with both Perl on Linux and on Windows, I
can safely say "Perl on Linux". But not because of any the above
The real reason is - mostly it's because it is so *painful* to work
with Window's idea of a terminal (coomand.exe or whatever it's
called). I mean, go ahead and try to write a Perl one-liner on that
lousy excuse for a terminal. You'll be banging your head into the
screen after the first few times, guaranteed :-)
> 5. What functionality does Linux Perl have that AS Perl does not and vice
Again, meaningless question. "AS Perl" comes with Tk built-in, while
the default vanilla Perl distribution doesn't. But that's easily
More information about the Perl