comment on

...shell out to do something, or do it all in Perl. Many purists argue that if it's possible to do it in Perl, you should do it in Perl. Portability and such.

I am not sure it is possible to argue that one should *generally* use a pure Perl solution, or *generally* shell out.
It's on a case by case basis.

For me, I suppose the deciding factor is portability requirements.

If the code needs to run in many different environments, such as CPAN module, then I would use pure Perl as much as possible. Definitely if it is possible in the core, less likey if a non-core modules is required. The result is probably quicker execution time.

If my production environment is limited to a certain type, as in your specific example, where the environment may be assumed, then I see nothing wrong with using the toolkit. The result is probably quicker implementation time.
--
bm

In reply to Re: Pure Perl or the toolkit? by bm
in thread Pure Perl or the toolkit? by Abigail-II

Are you posting in the right place? Check out Where do I post X? to know for sure.
Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags. Currently these include the following:
<code> <a> <b> <big> <blockquote> <br /> <dd> <dl> <dt> <em> <font> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr /> <i> <li> <nbsp> <ol> <p> <small> <strike> <strong> <sub> <sup> <table> <td> <th> <tr> <tt> <u> <ul>
Snippets of code should be wrapped in <code> tags not <pre> tags. In fact, <pre> tags should generally be avoided. If they must be used, extreme care should be taken to ensure that their contents do not have long lines (<70 chars), in order to prevent horizontal scrolling (and possible janitor intervention).
Want more info? How to link or How to display code and escape characters are good places to start.


P is for Practical
	PerlMonks