I've been around Visual Basic for years in high school, and I've grown up with the IDE supplied by Microsoft. It'd wonderful, but the educational and "working-model" editions of VB available to me through school don't allow me to redistribute software, as part of the EULA with Microsoft.
I instead find myself working in perl to design programs for friends and family, and it works fairly well, but I don't have a firm grasp on building user interfaces yet. I understand I could design user-interfaces with tcl/tk for perl, but the notion of coding all of that by hand is a bit daunting to me. That brings me to my question.
Do you have any suggestions for a tool I could use that would allow me to build GUIs for my perl programs?
Thanks in advance!
In addition to what tsee suggested, you can have a look at :
Perl/Qt (using Qtdesigner) and Perl::GladeXML (using Glade)
With Glade and Qtdesigner, you can generate a XML file that will describe your user interface and it will be a matter of hooking your perl code to widget's events.
I don't think you will find something as simple and well integrated for Perl as the Visual Basic GUI builder. A couple of pointers:
wxGlade can be used to design GUIs for the Wx GUI toolkit (for Perl, not only Python).
For Win32::GUI, you can use the GUI Loft to achieve something similar.
I think there's a bunch of other GUI builders including at least one for Tk, but I don't remember the name.
Either way, I believe you will have to accept that you have to do more coding vs. designing when compared to VB. The upside is that if you use Tk or Wx, your programs may well be portable to all major operating systems.
For a Perl-specific development environment, you might want to check out Padre, which is itself written in Perl using Wx. It's under active development, so eventually, somebody will probably integrate a GUI builder, too.
Frankly, having thought about GUIs for years and never getting round to them, I've found the best way to distribute GUI apps with perl is to use Catalyst, its built in server and for windows users, distributing it with Strawberry Perl (the professional edition comes with Catalyst included). For Linux or Mac users a local::lib installation to pull in the required cpan modules. Optionally bundle in a copy of portable firefox if you want not to have the usual web development pain caused by internet explorer.
tl;dr; Sidestep the whole issue by going for web development with a framework that comes with its own standalone server.
Related
I've built a set of tools I use in my day-to-day work and I would like to make them look a bit more "professional" in order to sell them to financial institutions.
At the moment these tools are written in Perl and are executed from a DOS command line, it's extremely efficient but it doesn't look very attractive.
So, I would like to add a user interface to it but I don't really know what to use for language knowning that :
A Perl CGI interface hosted on the web is not an option since the information to be given as input is quite sensitive.
It would be ideal to sell it as a package/executable.
I don't really like the Perl/Tk interface.
I'm ok with rewritting the application in another language but I would prefere to reuse the main modules in Perl since it's very powerful with regular expressions and lists/arrays.
What would you advise me to do ?
Thanks,
Lory
If you want a non-web-based GUI, and don't like Tk, there's also Wx, which is a wrapper for the wxWidgets GUI toolkit.
However, web applications nowadays can be really easy to create (using a modern framework). Take a Mojolicious application, for example: Mojolicious carries no dependencies other than Perl 5.12.x, and provides its own web server (Hypnotoad). You can start by generating a "Lite::App", which is a simple self-contained single-file application, and then grow it to a bigger distribution later on as the need arises. It even comes with tools to convert your application to a conveniently packaged distribution that can be installed as easily as any CPAN module.
So that leaves the issue of security. User authentication, IP whitelisting, local network only... there are many ways to make a web application "for internal use only" if that's what you need.
You might just throw together a web-application prototype, and once you determine customer interest in your product, invest the substantial time in writing it as a Windows GUI application.
Continuing on from DavidO's answer, because the current web microframeworks for Perl (I prefer Dancer over his suggestion of Mojolicious, but both are good and largely equivalent) contain their own bundled web mini-servers, they also allow for the app to easily run entirely on the local machine.
Since these mini-servers default to a non-standard port (usually 3000 or 5000) by default and you can easily set them to a different port, they can be isolated by firewalls relatively easily, ensuring that nobody can connect to them remotely. You can also, of course, include and IP address check in the app and have it reject any requests that don't originate from localhost.
My guess is that the target system will be Windows. Use a RAD (Rapid Application Development) platform to develop a GUI. Examples for such a platform are Delphi or .NET with C# or VB. For bundling the Perl part, consider using a tool called perl2exe.
It doesn't sound like your scripts should require a web server. Also, consider the installation hassle. Only guessing as you're not giving much information about what your scripts are doing.
I am using the Cava packager to deploy my Perl-written tools. You can even generate an installer executable with just some mouse-clicks. It works pretty well with strawberry Perl and wxPerl on Windows.
I am curious to know if there is any kind of programming library/framework for the C language for cross-platform programming of course. I mean there are already frameworks like Wxwidgets, Boost, Qt, U++ and etc for C++ available but I have not yet found any for C .
Updated Info:
We are trying to build an underlying Framework/library to be used in our project. We are going to eliminate the dotnet and instead provide a counterpart for those libraries which is fast and less demanding.
We will be working on a server/client based project, and thus the underlying services must be fast and also portable. GUI is not our priority now, but libraries providing threading capabilities is of importance to us.
And for the ANSI part, I think we are fine with that at the moment unless something changes that in the future.
if you write plain ANSI C, it should work on every POSIX system.
The most successful example of cross platform C library is standard C library itself (IMHO).
If you're looking for GUI toolkit GTK is the answer,
if you're looking for terminal UI, ncurses is pretty portable.
If you're looking for general use libraries, as long as they're written in ANSI C, should work almost everywhere, as long as it doesn't use system level APIs.
Can you just tell us, what kind of library/framework you are looking for ?
GTK+ is long established and actively maintained cross-platform C-only (or primarily) toolkit. You'll find not only on-line documentation but also books written about it. It is the framework backing up the GNOME project.
GTK+ is meant to build applications with UI, first of all. However, even if you don't need UI you'll find that some GTK+ components, namely GLib, provide general multiplatform support comparable with Qt. Actually, I needed a framework without UI at first and chose GLib over APR because I was able to find documentation and tutorials easier.
GTK+ was initially developed on UN*X an X-Windows which remains the platform where you can get it running the most easily. I wouldn't say that it is more difficult on Windows; it is just that you have more compiling environment options. I started with prepared GTK+ packages and MinGW but ended up integrating GTK+ with MSVC.
GTK+ exists for a long time and some people may find it old-school. On the other hand, it shows that it has proven to be stable and useful. There are also bindings for C++ and C#.
As with every big framework, the more you need from it the longer you will have to learn. But the other way round it works too; the more you learn the more you'll be able to do with it. Consistent coding style helps getting used to it.
--- Ferda
What are the disadvantages of the Tk module compared to other solutions to create a GUI in Perl?
I toured the various gui modules for Perl recently, and here is my summary (disclaimer: ultimately I found that none of the existing modules met my needs so I started writing my own gui toolkit).
Tk - Decent to work with and the interface is very perlish. The gui itself is a bit dated looking, and doesnt take advantage of any of the operating system's native widgets (like filepickers). On most systems it will require a C compiler to install.
Wx - Difficult to work with, un-perlish interface. Large programs almost require a gui builder to keep track of everything. Support for os level widgets is mixed. Nicer looking than Tk IMO. Compilation is involved, requires installing several libraries, can be difficult to get running on windows. The assembly of programs is very procedural, and does not map cleanly to what the program will actually look like.
Qt - last I looked this module was more or less abandoned and only supports Qt3. I didn't try to install it, but i imagine it needs a compiler.
Prima - Similar to Tk it has a dated appearance. Requires a compiler.
W32::GUI - I ruled this out early since it is not cross platform.
XUL::Node / POE::XUL::Node - rather heavy dependency tree that includes C code. Seems unmaintained and I had mixed experiences getting it to install. Windows was a no go, OSX was a no go, it had limited functionality on OpenSUSE. It also only supports a subset of the XUL language.
I found that none of the existing gui toolkits made it easy enough to distribute your application to end users. It is ok to expect programmers to jump through the hoops of resolving library dependencies and compiling code, but end users aren't going to do that. So the first requirement I had was to be pure Perl.
Secondly, nearly all of the existing gui toolkits force you to work in a very procedural manner: Create a container. Create a packer for the container. Create an object. Set properties on that object. Add the object to the packer. Run the packer to fill the container object. Repeat.
Instead, I find that nested design (like HTML) is easier to follow for two reasons. First off, since objects are nested, there is no need to name everything (label_456, label_457...). Secondly, the structure of the program mirrors the structure of what is displayed.
So I started work on XUL::Gui, and its been coming along rather well. It is pure Perl, and only depends on core modules for ease of installation. It has one external requirement, which is that a recent (3+) copy of Firefox is installed. It uses the familiar design pattern of web development with nested tags styled with CSS. It is certainly at a level where you could write fully featured single window applications with it.
Hopefully this helps you to figure out which toolkit is best for your project.
Tk has not been developed in a very long time. ActiveState now recommends development with their Tkx toolkit, which provides a thin layer over TclTk. It means that themed widgets are possible. But, TclTk is still quite primitive compared with many other GUI toolkits.
I haven't tried XUL:Gui but it seems the way to go.
So, there are several languages which will allow you to create a website, as long as you configure the server(s) well enough.
To my knowledge, there is:
PHP
ASP.NET
Ruby(on rails, what is
that all about?)
And thusly, my knowledge is limited. Ruby and ASP, I've only heard of, never worked with. If there are other languages, I suppose they have some way to make files containing the needed html. It would then suffice to add a line to the Apache config to associate the file-extension.
And if other languages: are there any notable characteristics about the one(s) you mention?
ANY language can be use to make a dynamic website - you could do it in COBOL or FORTRAN if you were twisted enough. Back in the olden days (about 10 years ago) most dynamic websites were done with CGI scripts - all you needed was a program that could read data from standard input and write data (usually HTML) to standard output.
Most modern languages have libraries and frameworks to make it easier. As well as the languages you have already mentioned, Java, C# and Python are probably the most common in use today.
Typically a web framework will have:
a way of mapping URLs to a class or function to handle the request
a mechanism for extracting data from a request and converting it into an easy to use form
a template system to easily create HTML by filling in the blanks
an easy way to access a database, such as an ORM
mechanisms to handle caching, redirections, errors etc
You can find a comparison of popular web frameworks on wikipedia.
How can you forget Java ? :)
Python
It runs on Windows, Linux/Unix, Mac OS X, and has been ported to the Java and .NET virtual machines.
Python is a perfect scripting language for web applications, e.g. via mod_python for the Apache web server. With Web Server Gateway Interface a standard API has been developed to facilitate these applications. Web application frameworks or application servers like Django, Pylons, TurboGears, web2py and Zope support developers in the design and maintenance of complex applications. Around libraries like NumPy, Scipy and Matplotlib, Python is a standard in scientific computing.
Among the users of Python are YouTube and the original BitTorrent client. Large organizations that make use of Python include Google, Yahoo!, CERN, NASA,and ITA.
This could be for your interest.
Virtually thru CGI all programming languages that produce output may use for web page generation.
Basically, you can use any language (if you are hosting your own server)
Very closely related and very interesting is this article where LISP has been used to build a very succesfull website.
Python has a 3rd party module CherryPy which can be used with or without a http server.
Amongst others: Erlang (YAWS, Mochiweb), Python
JSP has the advantage that it automatically wraps your code in a servlet, compiles that to bytecodes, then uses the just-in-time Java compiler to recompile critical sections into native object code. Not aware of any alternative which allows optimizes your work automatically in this way.
Also allows you to develop and deploy on any combination of Windows, Mac OS X, or Linux.
If you'd like to choose one for the beginning, you should check out PHP first. It gives you the basic clues about how dynamic sites work in general.
After you've become familiar with the basics, I recommend ASP.NET.
Fist off, you should know that ASP.NET is a technology and not a language. (It actually supports any language that can be used on the .NET platform.) Also it is not to be confused with classic ASP. (The old ASP was much more like PHP.)
ASP.NET is very easy to begin with, and after you have some clues about its concepts, you can always dig deeper and customize everything in it. The http://asp.net site is a very good starting point, if you are to learn it. I think it is really worth the effort, because even if you choose not to stick to it, it will give you some interesting ideas and concepts.
I tell you its most important advantages:
The code is compiled (and NOT interpreted like PHP), and it has a very good performance. (In a performace comparsion, it is 10-15 times faster. http://www.misfitgeek.com/pages/Perf_Stat_0809.htm)
It can be run on Windows without effort, and on Linux / Mac / etc using the Mono project.
It implements the Separation of Concerns principle very well.
It has most of the general functionality you'll need built-in. (Such as membership, roles, database management, and so on.)
Are there any technical benefits to Windows/Microsoft as a platform to use while developing, over a Unix dialect such as Linux or Solaris?
I know that companies choose Microsoft at times because there's simply not enough programmers available that know Unix, or that these programmers are much more expensive to hire.
So assuming all developers knew Unix and Microsoft equally well, would there still be cases where you are better off developing in Windows?
To me there's only two arguments for using Windows as a dev platform:
You have to because you're doing .Net/Windows development (or because the company simply gives you no choice); or
The apps, specifically Microsoft Office/Exchange. I'm sorry but OpenOffice is dreadful in comparison to Word/Excel.
Apart from that imho Linux has every other advantage including:
MUCH faster filesystem (particularly important when dealing with lots of small files). Last year I went from a build time of 8-10 minutes to 2-3 just by this switch (ant build of same code base);
Typically your dev environment then matches your production environment (if you're production environment is Windows your dev environment will be Windows almost guaranteed), which can be useful. We've had issues with Java classpath visibility because of differences between JBoss on Windows and Linux; and
A much better set of command line tools (yes I knwo you can use Cygwin, etc but it's not as good).
That's one reason why I find the idea of a Mac as my next dev workstation so appealling: you can look it as either Unix with applications (ie Office) or Windows with a decent filesystem (will be even better if/when OSX adopts ZFS), either way it's a win. The only thing that's really put me off is that Apple does stupid things like delay Java 6 release by a year just so they can put the Leopard Look and Feel in.
Just off the top of my mind:
.NET (even though mono is really great)
Visual Studio - probably the best IDE around
Excellent documentation (The MSDN Library is way much more developer friendly than man pages in my opinion)
Huge userbase (that's more like a business thing but still it is a very important factor)
Binary compatability (it's much easier to support 4-5 kernels and standard C library versions than the infinite number of combinations you can find in Linux distros)
One of the best things you can do is keep your options open. Chopse a platform independant technology and you'll be able to have software for any O/S or implementation. From a technical standpoint, this makes a lot of sense as well as from a business one.
As for specific technical advantages to the Windows platform, other than the large developer community and development information store and widely supported IDE's like Visual Studio, I'd say you'll be hard pressed to find one. Even there, Eclipse can do just as good a job with a platform independant technology.
Microsoft systems tend to have much better integration between different parts - there's a lot less heterogeneity to worry about if you're using binary-only software (x86 and comctl3d is a lot easier to support than everything *nix runs on).
The learning curve on Windows is shallow to begin with but has a longer overall distance. On Unix/Linux the beginning is a struggle but getting stuff done becomes easier later on, when the inner workings of the OS begin to make sense.
At least that's been my experience with them. Windows for quick payoff, Linux if you're going to be doing something much longer-term. And virtual machines if you can't decide :)
I think this question presents a false dichotomy. There's no reason you have to choose windows over unix or vice versa. Virtualization is free and easy. It's the best of both worlds!
One reason we have Windows development platforms (even though our production is on Linux or Solaris) is common environment for all.
That means all the different populations involved in the realization of a softwares:
are not all developers (business, functional people are also concerned with a working environment)
are all on the same platform (Windows)
use all the same tools to write/communicate (as in Word, PowerPoint)
can have their same environment on laptop
In short: uniformity of environment for all (developers and non-developers alike).
The other reason is depreciation: it is easy to manage depreciation for PCs, where the services are lighter than a full-scale Unix server (like a Sun Fire, a F15K or F50K, ...): the latter needs some expensive assistance service contracts (like "bronze", "silver" or "gold" depending on the level needed). A PC is easier to fix/replace, and is not as critical is a developer "mess up" on it and crash it utterly ;)
That being said, the downside of this is you do not change PC every day: it means managing a large parc of desktops, you cannot just decide to upgrade like that (and that goes for Os too).
So where the other answers are all about "virtual machine" whereas your set of PCs is from 2003, with only 40Go of hard-drive and 1, may be 2Go of memory..., you realize "virtualization" is not always an obvious solution.
Hence, some Unix "integration" server are required for developers to test their products in an environment closer to the target. In a way, this is better, since those integration servers are managed in a uniformed way, avoiding the syndrome of "it works for meTM", as opposed to virtual machine, where each developer is the own root/administrator of one's own little world/server ;).
I can give you a common arguments that Windows folks might make, though not one I necessarily agree with.
People sometimes think that Windows boxes at production time are easier to maintain and deploy. That is because there are a lot of visual tools available to the admin. Therefore they prefer .Net or a Windows-specific development language for easy integration.
If your customers or internal clients use all windows desktop computers, some would argue that its less legwork to do stuff with Windows servers. This includes stuff for Microsoft Office document sharing (i.e. sharepoint) or stuff with Windows File Sharing. Obviously its easier to write a .Net application to deal with such Microsoft-specific constraints.
I can't really think of any other reasons. The latter one is probably the most valid -- there just might be some microsoft-specific technology that is hard to integrate with unless you use MSFT development tools.
Peripheral reasons for some specific kinds of development:
you need to see how things look in both firefox and explorer
you're working with flash (which AFAIK you can't develop on linux, and the players are terrible).
you're working on a project that involved MS office integration
you're office has some godawful mail or notes system that you can't log into any other way. ditto for some vpn setups.
I consider all of these things to be regrettable.
Why not use both?
In either scenario, you could use a virtual machine in either Windows or Linux/Unix for basically nothing using Virtual Box or Vmware player. Or you could remote desktop/vnc to the other platform from your development box. If you develop in .net you would probably be better off on Windows for dev. If you develop for LAMP, either Windows/*nix would be fine.
give me apache mysql (ok postgres in a pinch) php and eclipse .. who cares about the OS ..