Re: Which is better: ActiveState or Strawberry Perl?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Which is better: ActiveState or Strawberry Perl? by Marshall (Canon) on Feb 17, 2012 at 10:39 UTC
I like this idea. Active State is very easy to setup (just an .msi file - no compiler needed). Their PPM (Perl Package Manager) is easy to use. The PPM GUI version takes awhile to start, but so what? Get a cup of coffee in the meantime... Once it starts, it is easy to use. I use it and I recommend it for others. One thing to note: the decision between Active State or Strawberry is not some "irreversible decision"! Perl programs will run under both! The important part is to get started!	[reply]
Re^3: Which is better: ActiveState or Strawberry Perl? by cjb (Friar) on Feb 17, 2012 at 13:22 UTC
"Active State is very easy to setup (just an .msi file - no compiler needed)." Strawberry Perl is the same, just one .msi to download.	[reply]
Re^4: Which is better: ActiveState or Strawberry Perl? by Marshall (Canon) on Feb 17, 2012 at 16:51 UTC
Ok, fair enough. But there is more past the initial installation. With Active State, you don't need a compiler for module installation because all the work of of the XS compilation, etc has already been done via the .ppd files. Compiling some of the more complex modules is non-trivial. The "one click" and "its done" feature is very compelling. For some reason that I've never been able to understand, generating the HTML documentation takes a long time.	[reply]