Don Hutton wrote:
Thanks to Mike and Huub for their quick and accurate responses. The key
is that you have to use "wxperl" (shipped with OS X) instead of "perl"
as your iinterpreter: something not mentioned in any example or other
piece of documentation that I could find.
I have no idea where the Mac OS X demo copy fits into the Grand Scheme
of things but it looks very bad compared to the wxPython example that's
(literally) in the next directory over. That demo has a "README.TXT"
file that says "Don't use 'python' to run these things: use
'wxPython'." When you do that you get an error message that says, in
plain English, "You're on a Mac: use this other command instead."
Something like this?
madhatter:~/devel/wxPerl/wxDemo mbarbon$ perl -Ilib bin/wxperl_demo.pl
On Mac OS X please run the demo with 'wxPerl wxperl_demo.pl'
madhatter:~/devel/wxPerl/wxDemo mbarbon$
The
inclusion of a README.TXT file with the one equivalent line in it for
wxPerl would raise the number of people willing to investigate it as a
Does this (in README.txt) help?
To install:
perl Makefile.PL
make
make test
make install
then run 'wxperl_demo.pl'; under Mac OS X you will need to run
'wxPerl -S wxperl_demo.pl'.
viable technology ("technology" = something you don't have to understand
to use, "art" = something you have to understand fully to use) by many
orders of magnitude.
I tend to disagree with the definitions above, but the suggestions
are unarguably good.
Things are about the same for the level of
commenting in the source code and provide the (given people's time
constraints) insurmountable barriers to adoption. The Python stuff is
massively and beautifully commented whereas there are almost no comments
in the Perl stuff.
Patches are always welcome :-)
Thanks for the feedback
Mattia
