NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.
All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report
Stories, comments, journals, and other submissions on use Perl; are Copyright 1998-2006, their respective owners.
Strawberry Perl (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Why so?
Re: (Score:1)
From the wiki:
Strawberry Perl is currently an alpha release and is not recommended for production purposes.My PHB would not like me doing that.
Re: (Score:2)
And your PHP would be right. However, when Strawberry Perl is ready for production, I can't imagine a reason in the world why anyone would want to stick with ActiveState.
Re:Strawberry Perl (Score:1)
I don't understand the PHP comment. I *hate* PHP. However, ActiveState works for our shop (Windows) and they have been very helpful when I have posed questions to them.
Once Strawberry hits a couple beta levels then I will try it. I *do* like the premise behind it.
Reply to This
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
I meant "PHB". Whoops :)
The nice thing about Strawberry Perl is that it comes bundled with its own compiler and make. As a result, you can use cpan and cpanp just like any other Perl installation. You're not dependent on ActiveState providing you a PPM or hunting around for a PPM from somewhere else.
That's not to say I have anything against ActiveState. They're a company, they need to earn money and they need to figure out the best allocation of their resources and shepherding a bunch of CPAN module
Re: (Score:1)
Ohhhh! PHB! I hate those too. : )
I will move to Strawberry Perl just because:
Those 2 reasons are good enough for me any day.
Re: (Score:1)
One thing I don't like is it sometimes takes them a long time to get secondary modules up-to-date. I just looked at Object::InsideOut and it is at 2.01 but I can only get 1.45 from PPM. I know they do their thing because of the binary support and corporate assurance but I can make those decisions.
SP just needs to get beta or something for me to try it at work is all.