[ale] Bash vs Perl

• Subject: [ale] Bash vs Perl
• From: slitt at troubleshooters.com (Steve Litt)
• Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 10:55:24 -0400
• In-reply-to: <1485303851.10413875.1477324859668.JavaMail.zimbra@outpostsentinel.com>
• References: <1935246388.10177638.1477089074781.JavaMail.zimbra@outpostsentinel.com> <CAEo=5PwSS0yA85bDuGF+909SvKj0u_9xbs=kdm5HREqPvs5s3w@mail.gmail.com> <1485303851.10413875.1477324859668.JavaMail.zimbra@outpostsentinel.com>

On Mon, 24 Oct 2016 12:00:59 -0400 (EDT)
Chris Fowler <cfowler at outpostsentinel.com> wrote:

> > From: "Jim Kinney" <jim.kinney at gmail.com>
> > To: "Atlanta Linux Enthusiasts - Yes! We run Linux!" <ale at ale.org>
> > Sent: Friday, October 21, 2016 8:00:46 PM
> > Subject: Re: [ale] Bash vs Perl  
> 
> > Parsing text in bash is much harder than in Perl. Associative
> > arrays in bash really help.  
> Yes. I do know you can do regex, but those features come at the cost
> of portability. 
> 
> The biggest ding in bash over perl could be the expense of fork().
> Using bash features that are not portable could recoup those. 

I use bash for stuff bash works for. If I need better performance in a
portion of the program, I can use Perl, Python or C for that part. For
sections where I need more sophisticated data handling, I can use Perl
or Python.

 
SteveT

Steve Litt 
September 2016 featured book: Twenty Eight Tales of Troubleshooting
http://www.troubleshooters.com/28

• References:
  • [ale] Bash vs Perl
    • From: cfowler at outpostsentinel.com (Chris Fowler)
  • [ale] Bash vs Perl
    • From: jim.kinney at gmail.com (Jim Kinney)
  • [ale] Bash vs Perl
    • From: cfowler at outpostsentinel.com (Chris Fowler)

• Prev by Date: [ale] Bash vs Perl
• Next by Date: [ale] Bash vs Perl
• Previous by thread: [ale] Bash vs Perl
• Next by thread: [ale] Bash vs Perl
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread