Hi,
Maybe if I explained why I think this is a good thing. As it stands right now, in order to use perl on a Windows box or on a unix/linux box, we need to install a variant of Perl on to it. Well and good except for mom & pop shops, corporate environments, etc. where the IT dept (if there is one) have their hands full with just maintaining the boxes and they really don't need to be installing and maintaining additional software except where absolutely necessary.
If a client machine was running Windows XP and was relatively current on the os patches, we would not have to install Perl on the box. We would write our perl script, send it through the Perl .NET compiler and install the .NET component (remotely maybe) without having to install Perl itself.
One thing I have noticed on PerlMonks, is that many perl coders sometimes forget that writing a script for a single box is not at all like writing a script for 50,000 machines where it has to work on 99.99% of the boxes 100% of the time. By taking the requirement to install perl on all the boxes out of the picture, we are able to reasonably support the 50,000 (or more) machines. Therefore, we would now have a valid argument to take to management about using Perl .NET over VBScript.
comments?
Jason L. Froebe
No one has seen what you have seen, and until that happens, we're all going to think that you're nuts. - Jack O'Neil, Stargate SG-1
In reply to Re: What are your experiences using PerlNET?
by jfroebe
in thread What are your experiences using PerlNET?
by jfroebe
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |