Re: Re: Re: Is Perl the best programming language

I'll just reply to the first part, everything else seems to be along the same lines.

And whatever technology gets the "job" done is just fine.

The problem is only partially defining "the job." The other part is defining "done." It's not a black and white issue. Every minute counts, every lines of code counts, every supported system counts, every microsecond of execution time and bit of memory counts. The statement seems to imply that two languages can be equal for a task - they cannot.

Keep in mind that you and your staff's knowledge of a language is a major factor in the decision. If you already know one language, and don't know the other major alternatives you would have to spend time learning them sufficiently to evaluate them, then learning them to a satisfactory level to complete the project. This all takes a lot of time, sometimes more than the project would take, so your compulsion to use Perl may make perfect sense in the vast majority of cases. Standardizing on one language does have many benefits.

Comment on Re: Re: Re: Is Perl the best programming language - a better way for discussion

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Is Perl the best programming language - a better way for discussion by sauoq (Abbot) on Oct 20, 2003 at 05:47 UTC
Now it seems we are in agreement. A couple of clarifications... The problem is only partially defining "the job." The other part is defining "done." If you are having a hard time defining "done" that's probably because the job in question is a proverbial "job that's never done" or it was poorly defined in the first place. The statement seems to imply that two languages can be equal for a task - they cannot. I didn't mean to imply that. But the choice should not be made through "objective analysis" of the languages alone. The decision should be made within the context of the "job" that must be "done". To bring this full circle and back to the original questions posed by pg, it comes down to this: if someone tells you that you picked the wrong language without being intimately familiar with the "job" you picked it for, he is talking out his ass even if he can argue the technical advantages and defend the disadvantages of his language of choice better than you can yours. -sauoq "My two cents aren't worth a dime.";	[reply]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Is Perl the best programming language - a better way for discussion
by sauoq (Abbot) on Oct 20, 2003 at 05:47 UTC

Now it seems we are in agreement. A couple of clarifications...

The problem is only partially defining "the job." The other part is defining "done."

If you are having a hard time defining "done" that's probably because the job in question is a proverbial "job that's never done" or it was poorly defined in the first place.

The statement seems to imply that two languages can be equal for a task - they cannot.

I didn't mean to imply that. But the choice should not be made through "objective analysis" of the languages alone. The decision should be made within the context of the "job" that must be "done".

To bring this full circle and back to the original questions posed by pg, it comes down to this: if someone tells you that you picked the wrong language without being intimately familiar with the "job" you picked it for, he is talking out his ass even if he can argue the technical advantages and defend the disadvantages of his language of choice better than you can yours.

-sauoq
"My two cents aren't worth a dime.";

[reply]