In my estimation, the true bottleneck in CGI programming isn't the speed of the underlying language. It's actually the fork-and-exec caused by the webserver process invoking the program.
Also to be considered is the wonderful innovation that is mod_perl, which makes scripts run like Jesse Owens. That removes both Perl's time-consuming compile-and-interpret phase AND the fork-and-exec bit.
Finally, we've reached a phase in the universe where programmer time is much more expensive than processor time. Perl was designed for munching and formatting text, and so it's very time-efficient from an implementation standpoint to write text mungers in Perl. Most managers and economists would point out that that, more than any other factor, contributes to the magnificent proliferation of CGI scripts in Perl.
Or maybe it's part of Larry Wall's insidious plot to take over the world. You never know, do ya?
I used to work at Motorola, and we'd have one internal memo every week that talked about a "new innovation" that would get us back into profitability.
Sadly, none of those memos said "we're firing all the pointy-haired idiots who are running this company into the ground," so they continued to bleed money like Amazon.com; only difference being that a multi-billion-dollar chip company isn't considered successful if it's capable of losing 86 million in three months.
Anyway, we all knew they were doomed, and bailed out, the split second they started talking about the secret "blackbird" set-top-box project. It was at the same time as the announcement that they weren't doing 401k matching for the next year, AND that executives were tightening the belt, and wouldn't be getting their two-year-old Lincolns replaced.
Oh, I'm terribly sorry, I've degenerated from ranting about Moto inventing neat products that are going to be miserable failurs because of mismanagement to simply ranting about mismanagement. Oopsie.
DoubleClick isn't neccesarily ignoring small fry; somewhere in the body of this well-written column, it is asserted that they ignore you unless you're at a certain threshold. Well, my site (http://www.auschron.com) is under said threshold, and we get a phone call from the sales weasels every other month or so. So they are prospecting towards smaller markets...
I was reading along, going "hey, Katz is actually mocking the clueless self-appointed visionaries whom he all-to-often resembles." I, for one, am sick of the endless, senseless hype, just like Katz appears to be.
And then I run into the bit about anonymous posters and their credibility.
Two words for you, big guy: Deep Throat. The anonymous source is such a longstanding journalistic tradition that your comment can only be construed as either ignorance or a quick backhand at the gasbags who relentlessly post mindless anonymous flamage regardless of the content of your actual post.
First, it's hypocrite. Dammit. Second, I would love to read *anything* on Slashdot where Tim O'Reilly gets mentioned and some knee-jerk flamer doesn't immediately start in with the "money" is evil stuff. After all, Stallman accepted a large award from the MacArthur foundation for the concept of the FSF. That's certainly making money off of free software. Additionally, Tim O'Reilly pays Larry Wall's salary. If that's not a significant contribution to this movement, WHAT IS?
Slashdot Mirror
...can be turned off by the owner.
By simply ceasing all electrical activity in the muscles, no doubt. No problem!
In my estimation, the true bottleneck in CGI programming isn't the speed of the underlying language. It's actually the fork-and-exec caused by the webserver process invoking the program.
Also to be considered is the wonderful innovation that is mod_perl, which makes scripts run like Jesse Owens. That removes both Perl's time-consuming compile-and-interpret phase AND the fork-and-exec bit.
Finally, we've reached a phase in the universe where programmer time is much more expensive than processor time. Perl was designed for munching and formatting text, and so it's very time-efficient from an implementation standpoint to write text mungers in Perl. Most managers and economists would point out that that, more than any other factor, contributes to the magnificent proliferation of CGI scripts in Perl.
Or maybe it's part of Larry Wall's insidious plot to take over the world. You never know, do ya?
I used to work at Motorola, and we'd have one internal memo every week that talked about a "new innovation" that would get us back into profitability.
Sadly, none of those memos said "we're firing all the pointy-haired idiots who are running this company into the ground," so they continued to bleed money like Amazon.com; only difference being that a multi-billion-dollar chip company isn't considered successful if it's capable of losing 86 million in three months.
Anyway, we all knew they were doomed, and bailed out, the split second they started talking about the secret "blackbird" set-top-box project. It was at the same time as the announcement that they weren't doing 401k matching for the next year, AND that executives were tightening the belt, and wouldn't be getting their two-year-old Lincolns replaced.
Oh, I'm terribly sorry, I've degenerated from ranting about Moto inventing neat products that are going to be miserable failurs because of mismanagement to simply ranting about mismanagement. Oopsie.
DoubleClick isn't neccesarily ignoring small fry; somewhere in the body of this well-written column, it is asserted that they ignore you unless you're at a certain threshold. Well, my site
(http://www.auschron.com) is under said threshold, and we get a phone call from the sales weasels every other month or so. So they are prospecting towards smaller markets...
"I was turned on in the H.A.L. Assembly Plant
in Urbana, Illinois, on January 12, 1997."
"Daisy, daisy, give me your answer, do..."
I was reading along, going "hey, Katz is actually mocking the clueless self-appointed visionaries whom he all-to-often resembles." I, for one, am sick of the endless, senseless hype, just like Katz appears to be.
:)
And then I run into the bit about anonymous posters and their credibility.
Two words for you, big guy: Deep Throat. The anonymous source is such a longstanding journalistic tradition that your comment can only be construed as either ignorance or a quick backhand at the gasbags who relentlessly post mindless anonymous flamage regardless of the content of your actual post.
And we know you're not ignorant.
First, it's hypocrite. Dammit.
Second, I would love to read *anything* on Slashdot where Tim O'Reilly gets mentioned and some knee-jerk flamer doesn't immediately start in with the "money" is evil stuff.
After all, Stallman accepted a large award from the MacArthur foundation for the concept of the FSF. That's certainly making money off of free software.
Additionally, Tim O'Reilly pays Larry Wall's salary. If that's not a significant contribution to this movement, WHAT IS?