[Pdx-pm] Perl Development on Windows
dpool at hevanet.com
Fri Dec 24 15:51:38 CST 2004
On Fri, 2004-12-24 at 10:42, Eric Wilhelm wrote:
> In the three hours that I spent dealing with Perl on a Windows box,
> the most frustrating thing is the braindead shell (which is
> frustrating regardless of whether you're using perl or not.) The ppm
> install system is okay, as long as you only need modules that are in
> the ActiveState repository (but it looks like there are a lot of
> them.) If you are trying to do anything with XS or Inline (compiled)
> code, you need to have the Visual C/C++ compiler to be compatible
> with the ActiveState build. I think I saw something about the Visual
> compiler being available for free now (though it's only the
> command-line version, (so what's visual about it?))
> Given all of those issues, I don't think I'd try it without cygwin.
> Then, you get the gnu tools, bash, cpan, tab-complete, etc.
> I know it's the smartass answer that everyone expects, but I think the
> way to make it "as good as possible" is to ditch windows.
Yeah, I keep coming up with this one myself...
> I setup a Linux box (Debian) in the middle of a windows network, and
> just let everyone that needs to run the code ssh or vnc into it. For
> about $800, you can get something that will do the job really well
> and be able to remote-admin it (I only have to install/sync to one
> box, and it supports several simultaneous users.) That works really
> well, and keeps me from having to worry about windows-specific issues
> in Perl (I haven't tried it enough to ever run into them, but the
> reading always seems to imply that there are quite a few (e.g.
> binmode(), fork(), etc.) But, I guess the internals guys are bending
> over backwards to make windows act like a real system, so maybe it's
> not too bad.
I don't know if this will be an option, but it's helpful to know when we
get to the "switch to linux" conversation.
Thanks everyone, all the comments have been a great help.
More information about the Pdx-pm-list