Re: Best Procedural Language?

Carlo Stonebanks wrote:

>>plPHP is not as mature as plTcl (or is that plTclng). However it is very
>>well developed and maintained. Heck, companies are even holding talks and
>>training classes on it now.
>>
>>
>
>What is lacking in plPHP? To be honest, even though I am a Tcl developer I
>would rather develop in PHP, and I know next to NOTHING about PHP!
>
>The thing is that Tcl leaves a bad taste in a lot of programmer's mouths -
>and I can't blame them. PHP looks and behaves like a "normal" programming
>language, so there's more likelyhood that other programmers will be able to
>maintain my code. (Imagine that - a developer worrying about how the NEXT
>developer will maintain his code! Think the idea will catch on?)
>
>I couldn't find a recent release of plPHP, and have no idea of its status.
>
>
ww.commandprompt.com/community/plphp/

Last release was 2005. This is the first release that is actually
useful, IMHO, because it allows SQL commands buried in the code, prior
releases did not.

My own totally unscientific I-didn't-get-very-thorough result from a
trial installation was that it was sloooooow, as in less than half the
speed of some comparable code in plperl. But I never isolated what was
causing the slowdown and so I can't really say much more. It was bad
enough though that I abandoned it very quickly, sucked in my gut and
coded some perl.

>Carlo
>
>
>
>---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org
>
>