"Pure perl" (probably oversimplified) means that you can install the module yourself by placing it and any of its supporting files in a directory and calling it with 'use lib' or pushing/unshifting it into @INC. Modules that are not pure perl have some sort of compiled supporting file associated with them and must be installed by root using a 'make install'.
----- Scot Robnett inSite Internet Solutions [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----Original Message----- From: Octavian Rasnita [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 9:38 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: 5.005_03 vs. 5.8 I've seen some differences between Perl 5.6.1 and 5.8, but only under Windows which is not your case. A problem of Perl 5.8 under Windows is that the module DBD::mysql cannot be installed with PPM. It might be compiled with a C compiler, I don't know. However, MySQL can be used under Windows and Perl 5.8 by installing the module DBD::mysqlPP. It is not so complete, but for basic functions, it works. This is a module for PurePerl. Could anyone tell me what "pure perl" means? Teddy, Teddy's Center: http://teddy.fcc.ro/ Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Scot Robnett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 3:24 PM Subject: RE: 5.005_03 vs. 5.8 ------------------------------------------------ On Mon, 2 Dec 2002 21:28:49 -0600, "Scot Robnett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am working with a university on a web project which entails setting up a > new server. We're going with Red Hat Linux on Dell hardware (RAID 5 > configuration), but I am not sure which version of Perl to recommend. I am > very used to 5.005_03, but 5.8 is the current release. > Nice choice. I would suggest you use the latest release so that you can have all the new features if you want them, but Perl is remarkably backwards compatible so little if anything should have to change in the old scripts. > Do I have a large learning curve associated with going the 5.8 route as > opposed to 5.005_03? > The learning curve is really as steep as you want it to be, many perlers still write what is basically perl 4 code in perl 5, that is very procedural, little scoping, etc. Others write everything in OOP with all the trimmings. Really comes down to how important effeciency on both sides aka the process itself and the design/development is to your project. If you can afford the little bit of time up front to design it more "cleanly" modular, etc. or whether it needs to be done yesterday may determine how many of the new features you can learn/use. > If I want to port scripts, will they need to be rewritten? > Doubtful, possibly a few lines of code here and there. > Are there significant benefits to using 5.8? > I defer to the internals gurus on this one, having some of the modules that are now standard is a big enough benefit to me, and knowing that if I ask for help and get an answer that was derived in 5.8 I don't have to be concerned about whether it will work in my version, etc. > On one hand, I want to keep up with the Joneses and take advantage of the > most available power, but on the other hand, I'm used to one flavor and you > know what they say about fixing things that ain't broke. > Yep. Really a situational question, but I would say you at least want to be running at 5.6.1 if for no other reason than to keep your own personal skills up to the current trends. Definitely have a look at the history (see perldoc perl) for the changes. You might also try installing perl 5.8 in a different location on the system, installing your app(s) and seeing if they run with that perl, then you can be sure. > Opinions, comments, suggestions? > Good luck. http://danconia.org -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
