| From: | "Carlo Stonebanks" <stonec(dot)register(at)sympatico(dot)ca> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Best Procedural Language? |
| Date: | 2006-08-02 14:43:29 |
| Message-ID: | eaqdma$1cf7$1@news.hub.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
> 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.
Carlo
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kenneth Downs | 2006-08-02 14:50:31 | Re: Best Procedural Language? |
| Previous Message | Michael Fuhr | 2006-08-02 14:39:51 | Re: prepare, execute & oids |