我对 Perl 完全不熟悉，但我想试试它。我了解到 Windows 平台上有两个相互竞争的发行版(我猜其他操作系统上只有 Perl:)。
维基百科说，Strawberry提供了额外的开发工具来编译 CPAN 模块，ActivePerl 有很多预先打包的模块，使用 PPM 更容易安装。听起来也不错！
这两者之间有一个明显的权衡。我想知道我应该选择什么开始？ 如果我选择一个，迁移到另一个有多难？
更新：
我对这两个发行版进行了几个星期的试用。事实上我两个都喜欢，这是件好事！ 这两种方法都不会出错。 最终选择 ActivePerl 只是因为它附带了离线文档(HTML 格式)——对于那些在路上或者只是不经常连接的人来说，它是一个伟大的生活救世主。 当在度假的时候，当我不总是在线的时候，我很容易就开始学习 Perl 语言。
分享
After having used both for years, I'd say, for me at least, Activeperl is a much more convenient choice. The ppm-Installer included in Activeperl allows you to add alternative ppm repositories which will give you access to almost all useful perl modules available on CPAN - but prepared and tested for windows. This was for me, in the long run, a much better (and more robust) choice. Even for the windows version of the Apache http server, there is a precompiled mod_perl (2.0.4) ppm available which will (did for me) work out of the box with Activeperl 5.12.1 and Apache 2.2.15.
I think I dropped Strawberry after trying to install DBI + DBD::mysql on Windows 7 (which is a no brainer in Activeperl, just click on the ppms and choose install).
But maybe that's solved by now. And maybe one can choose the directory where Strawberry gets installed (I couldn't).
BTW: for compiling your own Inline or XS stuff, just install the MinGW compiler by ppm (I didn't do that but it looks interesting).
Regards
rbo
Addendum: after reading the comment below, I checked Strawberry Perl again and it's now possible to change installation directory, which is a denoted feature of the 5.12.0 release (which is the actual version). This would solve one important (imho) disadvantage of Strawberry Perl (compared to Activeperl).
分享
