I see that an Anonymous Coward came out from under its bridge to attempt to incite mayhem. How small and sad.

The first two paragraphs are simply clueless spew. They are so vague as to be nearly semantic nulls.

The next one starts off promisingly, but drives off onto the content-free zone.

Slow? By what metrics? Compared to what? Execution time? Development time?

Memory hog? OK. It's not the leanest tool in the box, but if you have tight memory constraints, you maybe need to pick a different tool. It is excessive?

No OO support? Are you still using Perl 4? Or is it just that your pure vision of OO does not match the pragmatic Perl implementation?

No threads? My, my. You must be on an ancient Perl, for certain. No other explanation comes to mind that does not impugn your intellect and character.

Next you turn your fevered imagination to an artificial and contrived "benchmark" to claim that Java is an order of magnitude "faster" than Perl. Your "report" of your "testing" is notable for the complete absence of auditable data. Little things like the code you used for each case. Absent that, the claim is so much hand waving.

Now the Perl 6 dismissal... more hand waving with no substance.

Finally, unsubstantiated personal claims that appeal to a non-existent authority.

Wow. Let me pick out the useful bits.

Perl is a good regexp handler
Use Perl wisely, not cleverly.

Signal to noise ration: 1:30? (or am I an optimist?)

yours,
Michael

BTW: Had the screed been posted non-anonymously, I might not have downvoted the post, but anonymous screeds earn that large, negative reputation.