Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 01:34:15 -0700 (PDT) From: dima@freebsd.org (Dima Ruban) To: michaelv@HeadCandy.com (Michael L. VanLoon -- HeadCandy.com) Cc: dima@freebsd.org, joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de, lithium@cia-g.com, freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Adduser program in C Message-ID: <199605260834.BAA13985@freefall.freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <199605260749.AAA14805@MindBender.HeadCandy.com> from "Michael L. VanLoon -- HeadCandy.com" at May 26, 96 00:49:25 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Michael L. VanLoon -- HeadCandy.com writes: > > > >> Perl is certainly one of the fastest scripting languages. > > >fastest scripting language != fastest programming language. > >I don't think perl script is going to be faster when the same C program. > > You're comparing Apples to Oranges. Perl is a fast interpretted > scripting language. C is a compiled language. They are different > things. Compiled C and scripting-based languages are designed to > solve two completely different problems. Do you want me to compare sh+sed+awk and perl? I bet, first three is going to be faster and the same script which uses sh+sed+awk will requre less memory than the same script on perl. But I agree, there're whole bunch of things, that can be written on perl easier than on sh+sed+etc. > If you aren't interested in the rest of my long dissertation, please > move on to the next message now.... It depends on what do you want to tell... > How is C faster when you want to throw something together in two > minutes to do some complex automated task? In many cases it can be > many times slower, because it will take so much longer to write it, > compile it, debug it, and get it fully functional. what about `make'? > I generally see this attitude the most in "beginners" or theorists who > haven't actually had to design and plan large projects, then make all > the details work, on a repeated basis. People who haven't been three Now I have to decide who I am - "beginner" or theorist ... > months into a project, with lots of issues pending investigation, and > a product half written, who have to make literal trade-offs between > what they will be able to finish writing, and what they will have to > postpone, or remove completely from the product. There just isn't > enough time in our lives to write all the code to fix all the problems > that we'll want to solve. > > Scripting is an enourmously important part of Unix system > adminstration. When I used to be one of several people running a > large Unix site, if all our adminstration tools had been written in C, > we'd have gotten nothing done. I'm not speaking about all scripting languages. We had a discussion about perl scripts, I believe ... > [ ... skipped ... ] > If you don't like perl because it doesn't do something as well as > another language used for the same purpose, then you have a valid > concern. But, if you don't like perl simply because it's not C, then > you are completely missing the point... I don't like perl because this is fat. I don't like perl because this is slow. > Can you tell I had an English minor? Somehow I seem to have no > problem writing things that end up getting waaay too long... :-) Sorry, I'm an uneducated person. > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Michael L. VanLoon michaelv@HeadCandy.com > --< Free your mind and your machine -- NetBSD free un*x >-- > NetBSD working ports: 386+PC, Mac 68k, Amiga, Atari 68k, HP300, Sun3, > Sun4/4c/4m, DEC MIPS, DEC Alpha, PC532, VAX, MVME68k, arm32... > NetBSD ports in progress: PICA, others... > > Roll your own Internet access -- Seattle People's Internet cooperative. > If you're in the Seattle area, ask me how. > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- dima
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199605260834.BAA13985>