OK, I had to chuckle at this quote:
C is a compiled programming language considered to be exponentially faster than easy-to-program scripting languages such as PHP and Perl. According to the programmer, after installation, there is no piece of code not written in C.
Funny, they didn't mention what the "exponent" was.
Faster what?
brian_d_foy on 2002-10-12T21:27:45
Not only did they not say what the exponent was, but they didn't say what was faster.
Take a common task and let a reasonably skilled C programmer and reasonably skilled Perl programmer go at it and see which method finishes the work sooner and goes home earlier. That metric should please most people who do not see quality time with their keyboard as the root of their existence.
That quote sounds like a quote I just read in
MacTech (June 2002):
On the other hand, Python is simple to use, and it's more of a real programming language [than Perl]. It offers much more error checking than C, and being a very high-level language, it has high-level data types built in, such as flexible arrays and dictionaries that would cost you days to implement efficiently in C. Because of the more general data types, Python is applicable to much larger problem domain [sic] than awk or even Perl.
Although I do not a priori mind people pointing out Perl's shortcomings or comparing it to other languages, I do mind ignorant comparisons. In that paragraph one could switch Perl for Python without further edits because all the non-comparative statements describe either language. A good editor who have caught that sort of thing, perhaps wondering why Mac OS X comes Perl but not Python if Python is so much more useful and "real". If you read the
MacTech Writer's Kit though, you see that the editors really do not edit. You send them a completed article and do part of the production yourself, and then they pour it into Quark.
The magazine of SAGE,
;login: published a similar article in their August issue which gives me the same impression. It sounds as if these authors stopped using Perl or started using Python in 1996. Both articles (
MacTech and
;login:) talked about how well Perl solves system administration tasks, which is the give-away, I think. They used Perl when they were in one domain and were still fairly "narrowly-enlightened" (as we have all been at one point), then moved onto something else that expanded their enlightment. The thing that comes second then wins in any comparison.
I hate this pedantic attitude so much that I try to put an article in every
The Perl Review to compare Perl to some other language, although I get people who like the other language to write it. So far it has turned out well with articles on Python and Java, and one coming up on Ruby. I have my sights on SmallTalk and Lisp, and am open to other suggestions. Perl was not created in a vacuum, nor was any other language, perhaps making an exception for anything Steve Wolfram does. Our understanding of more languages make us better programmers in whichever one we choose to use. At the end of the day it is how much we get done, not which language we use. As a writer or advocate, bashing one language does not make the other meritorious.
Re:Faster what?
pjm on 2002-10-13T00:52:07
Mac OS X used to lack python, but if you're plugging away on 10.2, well....
~ % which python /usr/bin/python
(It's Version 2.2)
Re:Faster what?
brian_d_foy on 2002-10-13T03:26:30
yep, 10.2 has it, but that was a long time after that article was written. :)
now i want Ruby too :)
Re:Faster what?
Matts on 2002-10-13T09:44:35
10.2 comes with ruby too. $ ruby -v
ruby 1.6.7 (2002-03-01) [powerpc-darwin6.0]
Re:Faster what?
brian_d_foy on 2002-10-14T01:09:11
I guess I have to shell out the $129 bucks for 10.2 then :)
so which would you bet?
wickline on 2002-10-13T22:49:47
Maybe a new idea for a slashbox-style poll...
Including development/maintc time, C is exponentially faster than Perl. The exponent is
a) greater than 1
b) 1
c) between 0 and 1
d) 0
e) between -1 and 0
f) -1
g) less than -1
I'm particularly fond of the notion of imaginary speed gains
:)
-matt
Pet Peeve!
gnat on 2002-10-15T21:53:50
"exponentially" doesn't mean "much", just like "literally" doesn't mean "very". The writer's numeracy is as questionable as George Bush's literacy.
--Nat
