Re^3: Camel vs. Gopher

That may be so.

I see that you need more convincing, so here is another kill-feature of Go: Cross-compiling statically linked binaries.

On my linux-system I can build binaries for Mac (or Windows) that do not have any dependencies and will simply work when I copy ONE file to another machine running a different OS.

Do that with Perl.

Comment on Re^3: Camel vs. Gopher

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Camel vs. Gopher by Anonymous Monk on May 21, 2024 at 08:17 UTC
...here is another kill-feature of Go: Cross-compiling statically linked binaries. On my linux-system I can build binaries for Mac (or Windows) that do not have any dependencies and will simply work when I copy ONE file to another machine running a different OS. Do that with Perl. DONE! (Linux + Mac + Windows + FreeBSD + OpenBSD + NetBSD + BIOS) NAME Perl::Dist::APPerl - Actually Portable Perl DESCRIPTION Actually Portable Perl (APPerl) is a distribution of Perl the runs on several x86_64 operating systems via the same binary. It builds to a single binary with perl modules packed inside of it. Cross-platform, single binary, standalone Perl applications can be made by building custom versions of APPerl, with and without compiling Perl from scratch, so it can be used an alternative to PAR::Packer. APPerl could also easily be added to development SDKs, carried on your USB drive, or just allow you to run the exact same perl on all your PCs multiple computers.	[reply]
Re^4: Camel vs. Gopher by pwagyi (Monk) on Apr 28, 2019 at 14:52 UTC
The comparison doesn't make sense since perl is not normally deployed in binary form (executable/dll). You're comparing statically compiled language with dynamic languages (like perl/python). You don't use Perl if you need such compiled language feature.	[reply]

NAME

DESCRIPTION