On 5/3/2010 4:33 PM, Daniel Carrera wrote: > > After my recent experience, I can really see the merit in modularizing > PDL. It is possible that my frustration would have been smaller if TriD > were separate from PDL.
Hmmm. I don't agree. I think the problem for you was poor introductory documentation on how to install PDL, information on the best version to install (3.5 years out of date!), and a smoother, less complicated install process. I hate to say this, but... "you don't know how good you have it". :-) In the PDL-2.4.3 days, it could take weeks to resolve build issues and on many platforms it just plain would not build. With the current PDL-2.4.6, we can build almost everywhere with a bit of hand-holding, sometimes. For instance, you pretty much went up the whole install learning curve and ended up with a fully functioning PDL within a day. > While fighting with PDL / TriD / CPAN / OpenGL, at times I feared that > I had just hosed my entire PDL or CPAN installation. I did not enjoyed > deleting ~/.cpan and /usr/local/.../PDL and I worried about what effect > that might have. > > I can imagine that I might felt differently if TriD was separate. > > Of course, the real goal is for TriD to "just work". But I can see how > modularizing PDL is a step in the right direction. I think another part of the problems you were seeing was the pre-installation of the 2.4.3. PDL has known problems with pre-existing PDL installs of different versions leading to mysterious failures. Something we definitely want to fix someday. Here's to a future of 1-click installs for PDL everywhere. I'm glad you made it and Happy PDL-ing! Chris _______________________________________________ Perldl mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.jach.hawaii.edu/mailman/listinfo/perldl
