Rolf Banting wrote: > 1. Perl supports more programming paradigms than Java. Agreed. The problem is with perception. People identify Perl as a procedural language, and strongly typed languages (ie C#, Java) as modern languages enforcing modern concepts. We all know that's isn't entirely true of course. But that's the perception.
> 2. You write fewer lines of perl to get things done than you do in Java. I probably should have elaborated on this point. By way of 'minimise the learning curve', I mean an elaborate IDE which helps the user focus on key algorithms. Without the IDE, I would think programming Java is more unwieldy than Perl. But suddenly with Eclipse, it's all about click here and there, and having the system figure out some of the minor stuff for you. > Point 3 does scream "Java" but take a look at this: I could be mistaken here, since I'm only writing from the perspective of my local context. It's like the old buy-IBM mentality: nobody gets fired for buying IBM and have it fail. Here, no lecturer will be blamed if he were to train students on VB.NET/ Java, only to see the language fall out of favour.
