X-Git-Url: http://git.shadowcat.co.uk/gitweb/gitweb.cgi?a=blobdiff_plain;f=pod%2Fperlfaq1.pod;h=e9ac168408559d632c63d5910eb2495e6532adab;hb=24000d2f6ceadea08f0cd0a3282c486d5e818858;hp=2510a4b1f112fde12e5010f5cda623d577dc10be;hpb=68dc074516a6859e3424b48d1647bcb08b1a1a7d;p=p5sagit%2Fp5-mst-13.2.git diff --git a/pod/perlfaq1.pod b/pod/perlfaq1.pod index 2510a4b..e9ac168 100644 --- a/pod/perlfaq1.pod +++ b/pod/perlfaq1.pod @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ =head1 NAME -perlfaq1 - General Questions About Perl ($Revision: 1.10 $) +perlfaq1 - General Questions About Perl ($Revision: 1.23 $, $Date: 1999/05/23 16:08:30 $) =head1 DESCRIPTION @@ -29,14 +29,17 @@ distribution policy of perl. Perl is supported by its users. The core, the standard Perl library, the optional modules, and the documentation you're reading now were all written by volunteers. See the personal note at the end of the README file in the perl source -distribution for more details. - -In particular, the core development team (known as the Perl -Porters) are a rag-tag band of highly altruistic individuals -committed to producing better software for free than you -could hope to purchase for money. You may snoop on pending -developments via news://genetics.upenn.edu/perl.porters-gw/ and -http://www.frii.com/~gnat/perl/porters/summary.html. +distribution for more details. See L (new as of 5.005) +for Perl's milestone releases. + +In particular, the core development team (known as the Perl Porters) +are a rag-tag band of highly altruistic individuals committed +to producing better software for free than you could hope to +purchase for money. You may snoop on pending developments via +nntp://news.perl.com/perl.porters-gw/ and the Deja archive at +http://www.deja.com/ using the perl.porters-gw newsgroup, or you can +subscribe to the mailing list by sending perl5-porters-request@perl.org +a subscription request. While the GNU project includes Perl in its distributions, there's no such thing as "GNU Perl". Perl is not produced nor maintained by the @@ -50,12 +53,16 @@ users the informal support will more than suffice. See the answer to =head2 Which version of Perl should I use? You should definitely use version 5. Version 4 is old, limited, and -no longer maintained. Its last patch (4.036) was in 1992. The last -production release was 5.003, and the current experimental release for -those at the bleeding edge (as of 27/03/97) is 5.003_92, considered a beta -for production release 5.004, which will probably be out by the time -you read this. Further references to the Perl language in this document -refer to the current production release unless otherwise specified. +no longer maintained; its last patch (4.036) was in 1992, long ago and +far away. Sure, it's stable, but so is anything that's dead; in fact, +perl4 had been called a dead, flea-bitten camel carcass. The most recent +production release is 5.6 (although 5.005_03 is still supported). +The most cutting-edge development release is 5.7. Further references +to the Perl language in this document refer to the production release +unless otherwise specified. There may be one or more official bug fixes +by the time you read this, and also perhaps some experimental versions +on the way to the next release. All releases prior to 5.004 were subject +to buffer overruns, a grave security issue. =head2 What are perl4 and perl5? @@ -67,16 +74,37 @@ Perl5 is merely the popular name for the fifth major release (October 1994), while perl4 was the fourth major release (March 1991). There was also a perl1 (in January 1988), a perl2 (June 1988), and a perl3 (October 1989). -The 5.0 release is, essentially, a complete rewrite of the perl source -code from the ground up. It has been modularized, object-oriented, -tweaked, trimmed, and optimized until it almost doesn't look like the -old code. However, the interface is mostly the same, and compatibility -with previous releases is very high. +The 5.0 release is, essentially, a ground-up rewrite of the original +perl source code from releases 1 through 4. It has been modularized, +object-oriented, tweaked, trimmed, and optimized until it almost doesn't +look like the old code. However, the interface is mostly the same, and +compatibility with previous releases is very high. +See L. To avoid the "what language is perl5?" confusion, some people prefer to simply use "perl" to refer to the latest version of perl and avoid using "perl5" altogether. It's not really that big a deal, though. +See L for a history of Perl revisions. + +=head2 What is perl6? + +At The Second O'Reilly Open Source Software Convention, Larry Wall +announced Perl6 development would begin in earnest. Perl6 was an oft +used term for Chip Salzenberg's project to rewrite Perl in C++ named +Topaz. However, Topaz should not be confused with the nisus to rewrite +Perl while keeping the lessons learned from other software, as well as +Perl5, in mind. + +If you have a desire to help in the crusade to make Perl a better place +then peruse the Perl6 developers page at http://www.perl.org/perl6/ and +get involved. + +The first alpha release is expected by Summer 2001. + +"We're really serious about reinventing everything that needs reinventing." +--Larry Wall + =head2 How stable is Perl? Production releases, which incorporate bug fixes and new functionality, @@ -92,10 +120,10 @@ and the rare new keyword). =head2 Is Perl difficult to learn? -Perl is easy to start learning -- and easy to keep learning. It looks -like most programming languages you're likely to have had experience -with, so if you've ever written an C program, an awk script, a shell -script, or even an Excel macro, you're already part way there. +No, Perl is easy to start learning--and easy to keep learning. It looks +like most programming languages you're likely to have experience +with, so if you've ever written a C program, an awk script, a shell +script, or even a BASIC program, you're already partway there. Most tasks only require a small subset of the Perl language. One of the guiding mottos for Perl development is "there's more than one way @@ -103,18 +131,18 @@ to do it" (TMTOWTDI, sometimes pronounced "tim toady"). Perl's learning curve is therefore shallow (easy to learn) and long (there's a whole lot you can do if you really want). -Finally, Perl is (frequently) an interpreted language. This means -that you can write your programs and test them without an intermediate -compilation step, allowing you to experiment and test/debug quickly -and easily. This ease of experimentation flattens the learning curve -even more. +Finally, because Perl is frequently (but not always, and certainly not by +definition) an interpreted language, you can write your programs and test +them without an intermediate compilation step, allowing you to experiment +and test/debug quickly and easily. This ease of experimentation flattens +the learning curve even more. Things that make Perl easier to learn: Unix experience, almost any kind of programming experience, an understanding of regular expressions, and the ability to understand other people's code. If there's something you need to do, then it's probably already been done, and a working example is usually available for free. Don't forget the new perl modules, either. -They're discussed in Part 3 of this FAQ, along with the CPAN, which is +They're discussed in Part 3 of this FAQ, along with CPAN, which is discussed in Part 2. =head2 How does Perl compare with other languages like Java, Python, REXX, Scheme, or Tcl? @@ -127,22 +155,25 @@ Probably the best thing to do is try to write equivalent code to do a set of tasks. These languages have their own newsgroups in which you can learn about (but hopefully not argue about) them. +Some comparison documents can be found at http://language.perl.com/versus/ +if you really can't stop yourself. + =head2 Can I do [task] in Perl? -Perl is flexible and extensible enough for you to use on almost any -task, from one-line file-processing tasks to complex systems. For -many people, Perl serves as a great replacement for shell scripting. -For others, it serves as a convenient, high-level replacement for most -of what they'd program in low-level languages like C or C++. It's -ultimately up to you (and possibly your management ...) which tasks -you'll use Perl for and which you won't. +Perl is flexible and extensible enough for you to use on virtually any +task, from one-line file-processing tasks to large, elaborate systems. +For many people, Perl serves as a great replacement for shell scripting. +For others, it serves as a convenient, high-level replacement for most of +what they'd program in low-level languages like C or C++. It's ultimately +up to you (and possibly your management) which tasks you'll use Perl +for and which you won't. If you have a library that provides an API, you can make any component of it available as just another Perl function or variable using a Perl extension written in C or C++ and dynamically linked into your main perl interpreter. You can also go the other direction, and write your main program in C or C++, and then link in some Perl code on the fly, -to create a powerful application. +to create a powerful application. See L. That said, there will always be small, focused, special-purpose languages dedicated to a specific problem domain that are simply more @@ -152,7 +183,7 @@ languages that come to mind include prolog and matlab. =head2 When shouldn't I program in Perl? -When your manager forbids it -- but do consider replacing them :-). +When your manager forbids it--but do consider replacing them :-). Actually, one good reason is when you already have an existing application written in another language that's all done (and done @@ -161,17 +192,16 @@ certain task (e.g. prolog, make). For various reasons, Perl is probably not well-suited for real-time embedded systems, low-level operating systems development work like -device drivers or context-switching code, complex multithreaded +device drivers or context-switching code, complex multi-threaded shared-memory applications, or extremely large applications. You'll notice that perl is not itself written in Perl. -The new native-code compiler for Perl may reduce the limitations given -in the previous statement to some degree, but understand that Perl -remains fundamentally a dynamically typed language, and not a -statically typed one. You certainly won't be chastized if you don't -trust nuclear-plant or brain-surgery monitoring code to it. And -Larry will sleep easier, too -- Wall Street programs not -withstanding. :-) +The new, native-code compiler for Perl may eventually reduce the +limitations given in the previous statement to some degree, but understand +that Perl remains fundamentally a dynamically typed language, not +a statically typed one. You certainly won't be chastised if you don't +trust nuclear-plant or brain-surgery monitoring code to it. And Larry +will sleep easier, too--Wall Street programs not withstanding. :-) =head2 What's the difference between "perl" and "Perl"? @@ -180,69 +210,115 @@ signify the language proper and "perl" the implementation of it, i.e. the current interpreter. Hence Tom's quip that "Nothing but perl can parse Perl." You may or may not choose to follow this usage. For example, parallelism means "awk and perl" and "Python and Perl" look -ok, while "awk and Perl" and "Python and perl" do not. +OK, while "awk and Perl" and "Python and perl" do not. But never +write "PERL", because perl isn't really an acronym, apocryphal +folklore and post-facto expansions notwithstanding. =head2 Is it a Perl program or a Perl script? -It doesn't matter. - -In "standard terminology" a I has been compiled to physical -machine code once, and can then be be run multiple times, whereas a -I