in reply to perl quicker than bash?

This node falls below the community's threshold of quality. You may see it by logging in.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: perl quicker than bash?
by Anonymous Monk on Jan 06, 2015 at 01:57 UTC
    CPAN ... All of which represents "thoroughly debugged code that you can simply install ..."

    No and no, that is (unfortunately!) a (potentially dangerous!) misrepresentation.

    TiffanyButterfly:

    CPAN is awesome, but factors when choosing a module should also include: does it have tests, do those tests pass, how many releases have there been, how recent are those releases, do the bug reports indicate that there might be problems for you, is the documentation understandable, what do the reviews (if any) say, and finally, it has to actually install. If you don't want to go through checking all that yourself, have a look at module recommendations that experts have complied, e.g. Task::Kensho.

    Plenty of excellent stuff on CPAN but also plenty of stuff in need of more work because of one or more of these categories.

    A reply falls below the community's threshold of quality. You may see it by logging in.
Re^2: perl quicker than bash?
by eyepopslikeamosquito (Archbishop) on Jan 13, 2015 at 07:50 UTC

    Per contra, the Korn shell (ksh) is, AFAIK, the only Un*x shell whose built-in language is truly designed for programming. The Bash language is much simplified, and (IMHO ...) is generally designed for stringing other commands together.
    Sorry, but this is nonsense: bash is essentially a superset of ksh.

    Curiously, this is exactly the same nonsense that I corrected you on Nov 10 2014. Did you not read my response? Did you disagree with it, yet ignore it? Or did you simply forget the whole incident ever happened?