I'm not suggesting doing anything more than wrapping around WxWidgets.

And a few years ago I asked about including wxDDE* into Wx.pm and was told
no (but I don't recall who it was that said that at the time).

That is all I was trying to say.

Adam


On 9 April 2013 18:56, Mark Dootson <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On 08/04/2013 22:17, Adam Kennedy wrote:
> > This is the class in question.
> >
> > http://docs.wxwidgets.org/stable/wx_wxddeserver.html#wxddeserver
> >
> > And I stand corrected, this would fix the port problem ONLY on Windows.
> >
>
> Hey, if you want wxDDE I'll see if it builds with recent MinGW and add
> it. As it is a 1980's IPC I never really thought it represented a defect.
>
> >     The ideal solution is that WxWindows itself supports the necesary
> >     API for doing single instance support "properly" on each platform,
> >     but nobody would add that API to the Perl Wx bindings.
>
> Why would no-one add some part of wxWidgets/wxWindows to Wx? I assume
> what you actually mean is that this should be part of Wx and Wx should
> evolve into something more than a wrapper for wxWidgets?. Personally I'm
> of the feeling that I'd only want to commit to maintaining Wx as a
> wrapper around wxWidgets. I think Wx::SomeOtherDeveloper would be a
> great idea for bits that someone wants to add in that aren't part of
> wxWidgets. Then Wx::SomeOtherDeveloper could be just whatever you want
> it to be. I can't see that creating something that isn't part of
> wxWidgets would take any extra effort whatsoever to put in
> Wx::SomeOtherDeveloper and as Wx is a wrapper around wxWidgets something
> that isn't in wxWidgets would not to me seem automatically best placed
> in Wx. Importantly too, I don't see that putting something in
> Wx::SomeOtherDeveloper would add one iota of extra work for the implementer
>
> >     If we have better control over the evolution of Wx than when I was
> >     working on Padre actively, by far the best solution is to have it
> >     added to Wx.pm and then port to using that instead of my hand-rolled
> >     approach.
>
> What sort of control do you envisage? I can't imagine not helping to
> integrate any contributed code in the appropriate package nor helping
> with any request on how to integrate something nor handing over release
> and maintenance of Wx to anyone who wants to do it. I have no interest
> whatsoever in maintaining Wx with the narrow focus of a Padre
> sub-project. However, I have no sense of ownership over Wx so if anyone
> fancies doing something else with it then feel free to offer.
>
> Some code would be nice.
>
> Cheers
>
> Mark
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Padre-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mail.perlide.org/mailman/listinfo/padre-dev
>
_______________________________________________
Padre-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.perlide.org/mailman/listinfo/padre-dev

Reply via email to