Is PHP still slower than Perl?

[@]

A benchmark in 2002 showed PHP is much slower in shell or when Apache has
Mod_Perl.

With the new PHP kissing Java's ass, Perl is once again the #1 CGI choice.

Java is for a big team in short time to develope something slow.

ASP is a joke.

PHP is a kid.

Perl is around.

C. I don't know why it is not popular. It should be. Maybe those Web
inventors always thought in Linux so they never wanted to push something
binary so they selected Perl, a slower scripting.

[Daniel Tryba]

In comp.lang.php @ <as**@asdfsadf. com> wrote:

A benchmark in 2002 showed PHP is much slower in shell or when Apache has
Mod_Perl.

With the new PHP kissing Java's ass, Perl is once again the #1 CGI choice.

If you want to troll, please put a little more effort in it.

Like make up some benchmarks to support your facts.

--

Daniel Tryba

[Joe Smith]

@ wrote:

C. I don't know why it is not popular.

I'd say it is because C does not have strings as a native data type.
Other than initializing an array of char, the C compiler has no
string manipulation built in; it requires library functions to do that.
-Joe

[Janwillem Borleffs]

@ wrote:

With the new PHP kissing Java's ass, Perl is once again the #1 CGI
choice.

You mean this regarding PHP 5's OO model? You have never looked at Perl 6's
OO model, haven't you?
JW

[John Bokma]

"@" <as**@asdfsadf. com> wrote in news:hO******** ************@ro gers.com:

A benchmark in 2002 showed PHP is much slower in shell or when Apache
has Mod_Perl.

With the new PHP kissing Java's ass, Perl is once again the #1 CGI
choice.

For me Perl is #1 (if possible) because PHP is probably the worst designed
language ever. I am not sure if you can already prepare statements (MySQL),
something I used in Perl ages ago, or still have to use all those
whatsamacalled_ quote_shebang garbage.
--
John MexIT: http://johnbokma.com/mexit/
personal page: http://johnbokma.com/
Experienced programmer available: http://castleamber.com/
Happy Customers: http://castleamber.com/testimonials.html

[Tony Marston]

"John Bokma" <po********@cas tleamber.com> wrote in message
news:Xn******** *************** **@130.133.1.4. ..

"@" <as**@asdfsadf. com> wrote in news:hO******** ************@ro gers.com:

A benchmark in 2002 showed PHP is much slower in shell or when Apache
has Mod_Perl.

With the new PHP kissing Java's ass, Perl is once again the #1 CGI
choice.
For me Perl is #1 (if possible) because PHP is probably the worst designed
language ever. I am not sure if you can already prepare statements
(MySQL),

Yes you CAN use prepare statemetnts with MySQL. You should be aware that
this is a MySQL feature, not a PHP feature.
something I used in Perl ages ago, or still have to use all those
whatsamacalled_ quote_shebang garbage.

If you don't like PHP then why are you posting to the PHP newsgroup?

--
Tony Marston

http://www.tonymarston.net

[@]

> > A benchmark in 2002 showed PHP is much slower in shell or when Apache
has

Mod_Perl.

With the new PHP kissing Java's ass, Perl is once again the #1 CGI

choice.
If you want to troll, please put a little more effort in it.

Like make up some benchmarks to support your facts.

--

Daniel Tryba

google with PHP PERL BENCHMARK, you will see the results. That is the one
back from 2002.

http://216.239.39.104/search?q=cache...ark+2002&hl=en

[Darin McBride]

Janwillem Borleffs wrote:

@ wrote:

With the new PHP kissing Java's ass, Perl is once again the #1 CGI
choice.

You mean this regarding PHP 5's OO model? You have never looked at Perl
6's OO model, haven't you?

First off, as Perl 6 doesn't really exist yet, the original flame^Wpost
must be comparing against Perl 5.

Second, Perl 6's OO model could yet do a few 180's.

Third, who said anyone would use Perl 6 for CGI?

Fourth, who said Perl 6's performance would suck?

Fifth, I'm not saying PHP 5's performance sucks - I'm just inferring it
from @'s flame^Wpost.

[Tassilo v. Parseval]

Also sprach Joe Smith:

@ wrote:

C. I don't know why it is not popular.

I'd say it is because C does not have strings as a native data type.
Other than initializing an array of char, the C compiler has no
string manipulation built in; it requires library functions to do that.

That's a distinction in C that's moot. It has no built-in IO mechanisms
either. You have to include a header to get this functionality. But
nonestheless, it's still part of the language.

Tassilo
--
$_=q#",}])!JAPH!qq(tsuJ[{@"tnirp}3..0}_ $;//::niam/s~=)]3[))_$-3(rellac(=_$({
pam{rekcahbus}) (rekcah{lrePbus })(lreP{rehtona bus})!JAPH!qq(r ehtona{tsuJbus# ;
$_=reverse,s+(? <=sub).+q#q!'"q q.\t$&."'!#+sex isexiixesixeseg ;y~\n~~dddd;eva l

[Daniel Tryba]

In comp.lang.php @ <as**@asdfsadf. com> wrote:

If you want to troll, please put a little more effort in it.

Like make up some benchmarks to support your facts.
google with PHP PERL BENCHMARK, you will see the results.

That is not how it works: you make a claim, so you supply your proof. And
I'm more interested in perl/php vs. java.
That is the one
back from 2002.

2002 is so 2 years ago, that like ancient man.

--

Daniel Tryba