[BNE-PM] What do you use Perl for?

[Derek Thomson]

Damian James wrote:
> At 12:02 PM 20/08/2002 +1000, Derek Thomson wrote:
> 
>>I'd really like a "quick intro to mod_perl" if we ever get these 
>>tutorials/presentations off the ground.
> 
> 
> Lincoln Stein and Doug MacEachern, _Writing Apache modules in Perl and C_ 
> is the definitive intro. It is very, very good. Sits next to the other
> book by Stein, _Network Programming with Perl_ on my bookshelf at ork.
> 
> I'd be happy to put together and give such a talk if we can get to 
> such a stage. 

That would be appreciated. There's so many topics that apply to Perl 
(and computing in general), that's it's nice to get a knowledgable 
overview so you can find out if you're really interested - before you 
decide to invest lots of money and time checking it out. It's also nice 
to know what books are good, and what modules are useful and in what 
situations.

(eg there's lots of XML modules, but not all are suitable for all uses, 
but OTOH I've not seen one yet that is clearly redundant)

> My current gig is developing web applications with Perl, 
> Apache and MySQL but I am mostly acting as a sysadmin which tends to 
> detract from the time I can spend coding. 

Do you want to weigh in on the Java/Web debate? Have you tried Java for 
this? Does anything about it make you want to switch (apart from job ad 
critical mass)?

> 
> So I am writing weird stuff, like scripts for migrating NT roaming 
> profiles over samba shares on the unix side, but updating a Windows 
> PDC afterwards.
> 
> Tip: use more than one of the perls available for Windows, if you 
> are forced to use that platform. Activestate is good for access to 
> more of the Win32API stuff, while cygwin is better if you need real 
> UNIX-like system calls. which it emulates. I find that doing without 
> select(2) when writing network utilities is an exercise in frustration. 

Yes, Perl definitely makes Windows more usable. No wonder MS throw money 
at the Windows port - it's more sensible than trying to extend the 
"batch file" mess.

And yes, I did just say MS did something sensible :)

--
D.