| From: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Carlo Stonebanks <stonec(dot)register(at)sympatico(dot)ca> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Best Procedural Language? |
| Date: | 2006-08-02 15:37:47 |
| Message-ID: | 44D0C6CB.9060401@commandprompt.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
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!
There are some known issues that cause it to crash, you can see the
project site for an example.
Also it requires the apache apxs stuff which doesn't make it the most
portable.
We are looking at ways to make it not have the apache requirement.
Joshua D. Drake
--
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kenneth Downs | 2006-08-02 15:41:24 | Re: Best Procedural Language? |
| Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2006-08-02 15:36:53 | Re: Best Procedural Language? |