Re^2: Performance penalties of in-Perl docn vs compiled CGIs.

Hey, thanks for a most thoughtful and informative reply, bliako. Yes, I figured that I was asking the sort of "dumb question" inevitable for amateurs and dilettantes in any subject. I've always regarded Perl as a major intellectual accomplishment, and its internal complexity and inner convolutions make traditional compilation far more difficult than the simplistic assumptions of my question, if I understand you correctly.

So be it! Once written in Perl, it stays in Perl! I can live with that. And the analogue of Sisyphus describes VERY nicely my own view of coding as a profession, which is why I went with hardware. So no, NO WAY am I intending to "go this way". Simply lack the courage.

Comment on Re^2: Performance penalties of in-Perl docn vs compiled CGIs.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Performance penalties of in-Perl docn vs compiled CGIs. by bliako (Abbot) on Feb 02, 2021 at 14:16 UTC
By all means I did not try to discourage you. The method to compile is so simple you may as well give it a try.	[reply]
Re^4: Performance penalties of in-Perl docn vs compiled CGIs. by phirun (Novice) on Feb 02, 2021 at 15:41 UTC
> I did not try to discourage you ... may as well give it a try. Not at all discouraged and yes, I'll play around with the code examples you've given. I've never used eval's and don't bother with modules other than standard ones, since I find that the effort of learning them is usually better spent writing your own. But the new project will shortly involve others, so I've decided to take a look at solutions I've previously avoided as being better suited to group efforts.	[reply]