in reply to Re: Re (tilly) 2: Why Use Perl?
in thread Why Use Perl?

How many Fortune 1000 companies do you know of that've standardized on gcc, as compared to the number that've standardized on VC? ... Dont' get me wrong; gcc is great, but... VC has more books on the shelves.

There is a real and important distinction between "standardizing on" and "using to good effect." I know plenty of companies, including several in the Fortune 500, who are quite happy to officialy "standardize on" one set of things (like CASE tools and methodologies, and in some cases Microsoft), then quietly look the other way when people actually need to get something mission critical done. And that includes using Perl, Apache, Linux/FreeBSD, Samba, gcc, etc. Quietly, in the back room. They're more up-front about using Java. I see much more Java development in Fortune 1000 shops than I see C/C++ development. Three years ago, it was the other way around (at least for what I was seeing.)

The point remains that MS is the best selling C++ compiler on the market.

That's true. For compilers you have to buy, Microsoft's is the best selling one. However, that's kind of a non-point given that gcc comes free with most Linux distributions. (Oh, and Perl know ships with Solaris.)

Dont' get me wrong; gcc is great, but... VC has more books on the shelves.

True, but a) VC needs more books to use effectively, and b) Microsoft Press is hardly going to publish a book on gcc. (And I've been in several Fortune 100 developer offices that have more O'Reilly books than they do Microsoft Press.)