Because I understand that despite what you seem to think, the
technical challenges involved in language choice for larger
software projects are about 1% "does the syntax of language x
allow me to do y in this particularly neat way?" and 99% "how
many keen programmers skilled in language x do I have/can I
attract right now? ... "
What I'm hearing here is you're arguing that the smear campaign
worked, you convinced enough of the kids that perl is not bright
and shiney, and obviously management should move on to something
that is regarded as bright and shiney so they'll have more kids
to mess around with.
The thing that folks like yourself should ask yourself is (1) am
I ready to drop my favorite technology when it's no longer the
latest fad? (Ruby programmers are going through an awkward phase
right now...); (2) when getting a project started, there may be
virtues with being fad-compliant, but are you going to tell
management to throw it all away and re-write it all when the next
fad comes along? (There are *always* guys like that around,
everywhere... and many people in management have learned to stop
listening to them...)
... so there's really no point wasting time having
the argument I imagine you want to have with me that goes like
this: me: "oh, but Perl doesn't have such-and-such a feature"
you: "of COURSE it does, you just cross the index and middle
fingers of your left hand and recite the last verse of Genesis
There are features of perl, by the way, that to my knowledge
don't exist in any of the competing languages, like full unicode
support, including the ability to use regexps to search for
characters in a particular unicode character class.
What I expect to hear in response is: "Oh, that crap doesn't
matter." (Uh, Unicode?); And then once the other languages catch up
I expect to hear "Look, we have that crap now too!". That's the way it goes in
the fabulously rational world of Software Engineering.