Date: Thu, 21 Nov 1996 15:07:43 +1100 From: davidn@sdev.usn.blaze.net.au (David Nugent) To: msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au (Michael Smith) Cc: terry@lambert.org, roberto@keltia.freenix.fr, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Who needs Perl? We do! Message-ID: <Mutt.19961121150743.davidn@sdev> In-Reply-To: <199611210344.OAA10837@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au>; from Michael Smith on Nov 21, 1996 14:14:52 %2B1030 References: <Mutt.19961120162842.davidn@sdev> <199611210344.OAA10837@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Michael Smith writes: > > Yes, I use it quite a bit, but in a base distribution I don't really > > see it as an appropriate tool. It is certainly easier that programming > > in, say, bourne shell, and probably significantly faster too. But I > > still think it is a mistake it being part of the base system. > > I think that there's a very important line to be drawn between "I > don't think I need it in the system" and "It should not be in the > system". Agreed. But there's also the distinction between "needed" and "desired". Certainly *I* regard Perl as an indispensible tool for what I do. I'm less certain that everyone else would regard it in the same light, which is why I still don't think it appropriate for a *base* distribution. > My point is that there are a sufficient number of people that consider > Perl a 'should-have' to justify its inclusion on those grounds. >From a more pragmatic standpoint, I disagree. Yes, lots of people want or need it in what they do, but whether it is *needed* to run/install/build the base system is a different question. Right now there is some dependance on perl (and using an outdated and unsupported version), but my worry is that it being there in the first place is more likely to increase that dependance. The point is not really whether perl4 disappears or not (it *must* do so eventually - it is, as I said, old and unsupported) but whether perl5 is needed in the base distribution. Perl5 is huge and is delivered with quite a deal of bloat. Too big for the small dependancies that currently exist. If we used perl and most the anciliary modules and the scripts which depended on it could not be so easily replaced (and I'll admit that sgmlfmt appears to be one of those), then it would be justified. > The latter point bears discussion; someone putting this point needs to > offer a counter to the benefits promised by the former. So far, most > of the arguments have been "because I don't think it should be" (which > counts for very little), or "because Perl keeps changing" (which has > been comprehensively refuted by Perl users I am inclined to trust). Yes, the "keeps changing" argument is indeed bogus. There are one or two minor syntactic changes, which later versions of perl have built-in warnings for are easily handled, certainly easily enough done for the scripts that are actually installed under -current. > Other arguments that have been offered for the latter in previous > discussions; "Perl is too big" (size is relative, disk is cheap), > "Perl would be too hard to track" (contrib scheme should fix this). > > I'm still open to argument on this; I just haven't heard a counter > that holds up under scrutiny. If all that was required for a proper perl5 distribution was the perl executable itself, I'd have no real argument. It is all of the unneeded (for the *base* distribution) cruft that comes with it that is the problem. Even perl4 has this problem to a lesser extent, but as I read it, this (size/unnecessary bloat problem) is the root of the reluctance to upgrade perl4 to perl5. Central to my argument is that perl4 is no longer viable. Either perl should be removed completely from the base distribution, or it should be upgraded to perl5. Personally, I favour removal, because I'm a purist (a self-admitted fault :-)). This is not to say that perl is not useful - *IT IS* - but that, like many other useful things, it should be an addition to the base system. Even in -current, we don't win very much from the expense of having it (again, with the exception of sgmlfmt). Regards, David Nugent, Unique Computing Pty Ltd - Melbourne, Australia Voice +61-3-9791-9547 Data/BBS +61-3-9792-3507 3:632/348@fidonet davidn@blaze.net.au http://www.blaze.net.au/~davidn
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Mutt.19961121150743.davidn>