From owner-freebsd-hackers  Tue Aug 12 16:08:58 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id QAA29166
          for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 12 Aug 1997 16:08:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from panda.hilink.com.au (panda.hilink.com.au [203.8.15.25])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id QAA29150
          for <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Tue, 12 Aug 1997 16:08:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from danny@localhost)
	by panda.hilink.com.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id JAA17188;
	Wed, 13 Aug 1997 09:11:05 +1000 (EST)
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 09:11:04 +1000 (EST)
From: "Daniel O'Callaghan" <danny@panda.hilink.com.au>
To: Jaye Mathisen <mrcpu@cdsnet.net>
cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: What's the interest in standard tools rewritten in perl?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.3.95.970812152451.1820L-100000@mail.cdsnet.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.91.970813090658.308P-100000@panda.hilink.com.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk


On Tue, 12 Aug 1997, Jaye Mathisen wrote:

> I was in the process of adding some flexibility to newsyslog, and decided
> to just rewrite the darn thing in perl5.
> 
> Essentially I added the ability to datestamp the logfiles, and a couple of
> other things.
> Anyway, just curious.

I'm sure many of us have sysadmin tools written in perl; I do.  However,
each time my perl scripts run, they weigh down my machine and I wish I had
the time to write the programs in C.  Each time something in the system is
converted from C to perl, the general performance of FreeBSD will appear
to be that small amount more sluggish (less zippy, perhaps). There's a
software company in Seattle which writes code like this... 


/*  Daniel O'Callaghan                                                     */
/*  HiLink Internet <http://www.hilink.com.au/>       danny@hilink.com.au  */
/*  FreeBSD - works hard, plays hard...                 danny@freebsd.org  */