Re: wxPerl

[Dave Turner <novalis@novalis.org>]

Nguon Hao Ching wrote:
> 
> Hey, this looks interesting:
> 
>     http://www.perl.com/pub/a/2001/09/12/wxtutorial1.html
> 
> Dave, what do you think?

I have used this in C++, and found it to be completely impossible to debug
programs written with it.

It was also difficult to create new widgets, and didn't have sensible
defaults, so you had to specify everything.

Maybe the Perl version is better, however, it's still verbose.

Consider the 3rd program, 83 lines long.  It's only 62 lines in java, and the
lines are shorter.  There is less need for comments, because it's obvious what
the (much fewer) arguments to functions represent.

http://kafka.i-site.com/~novalis/java-talk/ButtonApp2.java

The absolute positioning which is absolutely everywhere in WxWindows
absolutely sucks too.  Wanna know why?  See this:

http://kafka.i-site.com/~novalis/java-talk/ButtonApp2.gif

That's because of different font sizes.

Now, a Perl version of that Java program would be roughly as many lines.  A
few more because OO is not as consise, a few less because the Action and
Window Listeners would be replaced with anonymous subs.

Still, you need the comments on the function calls in the Wx program, because
there are too many arguments to remember what each argument does.  

-- 
-[Dave Turner                 Stalk me:  (215)-545-2859]
--------------------------------------------------------
<Rakshasa> NO IT ISN'T, it's like saying bananas are the 
           dark side of fish.
**Majordomo list services provided by PANIX <URL:http://www.panix.com>**
**To Unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe phl" to majordomo@lists.pm.org**