Tcl - mktclapp & Tcl/Tk 8.4.x

Author

mktclapp & Tcl/Tk 8.4.x

Shaun Deacon

2004-12-16, 3:57 am

Hopefully somebody on the list can answer this...

Is "mktclapp" fully compatible with Tcl/Tk 8.4.x ?
and if not...are there plans to update it ?

While wrapping an application which uses 8.4.9, I now
get compiler warnings regarding incompatible pointer
types (I suspect due to 8.4's const correctness)

cheers
Shaun

--
Shaun Deacon
SOCDEC, Fujitsu Microelectronics America
phone: ++1 408 737 5627 [coins: 7933 75627]
email: sdeacon@fma.fujitsu.com
--

Jeff Hobbs

2004-12-16, 3:57 am

Shaun Deacon wrote:

> Hopefully somebody on the list can answer this...
>
> Is "mktclapp" fully compatible with Tcl/Tk 8.4.x ?
> and if not...are there plans to update it ?
>
> While wrapping an application which uses 8.4.9, I now
> get compiler warnings regarding incompatible pointer
> types (I suspect due to 8.4's const correctness)

I believe that Richard abandoned the mktclapp effort in favor
of starkits: http://wiki.tcl.tk/starkit.

--
Jeff Hobbs, The Tcl Guy
http://www.ActiveState.com/, a division of Sophos

Shaun Deacon

2004-12-16, 4:08 pm

Jeff Hobbs wrote:

> I believe that Richard abandoned the mktclapp effort in favor
> of starkits: http://wiki.tcl.tk/starkit.

Yes, I kind of anticipated this answer... and had already started
thinking that starkits would be the way to go after sending the
question.

thanks,
Shaun

--
Shaun Deacon
SOCDEC, Fujitsu Microelectronics America
phone: ++1 408 737 5627 [coins: 7933 75627]
email: sdea...@fma.fujitsu.com
--

Ian Gay

2004-12-16, 8:58 pm

"Shaun Deacon" <sdeacon@fma.fujitsu.com> wrote in
news:1103220459.020935.74100@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:

> Jeff Hobbs wrote:
>
>
> Yes, I kind of anticipated this answer... and had already started
> thinking that starkits would be the way to go after sending the
> question.
>

Agreed. But MKTCLAPP does provide some helpful utilities that can be used
for building dll/so's that will be incorporated in the tcl/starkit.

*** To reply by e-mail, make double u single in address ***

Jeff Hobbs

2004-12-16, 8:58 pm

Ian Gay wrote:
> "Shaun Deacon" wrote in
> news:1103220459.020935.74100@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:
>
> Agreed. But MKTCLAPP does provide some helpful utilities that can be used
> for building dll/so's that will be incorporated in the tcl/starkit.

What kind of utilities would those be (having never been a
user)? A standard built Tcl extension that uses stubs is all
you need, and if you base it on the sample TEA extension, then
it should be rather easy to create dll/so's.

--
Jeff Hobbs, The Tcl Guy
http://www.ActiveState.com/, a division of Sophos

Ian Gay

2004-12-17, 3:59 pm

Jeff Hobbs <jeffh@removethis.activestate.com> wrote in
news:41C20352.1010908@removethis.activestate.com:

> Ian Gay wrote:
>
> What kind of utilities would those be (having never been a
> user)? A standard built Tcl extension that uses stubs is all
> you need, and if you base it on the sample TEA extension, then
> it should be rather easy to create dll/so's.
>

'Utilities' was not a good choice of words. I meant he provides half a
dozen or so C routines that interface conveniently to the tcl C api for
common tasks like defining new commands and returning results.

Ian

--
*** To reply by e-mail, make double u single in address ***

Jeff Hobbs

2004-12-17, 3:59 pm

Ian Gay wrote:
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
> 'Utilities' was not a good choice of words. I meant he provides half a
> dozen or so C routines that interface conveniently to the tcl C api for
> common tasks like defining new commands and returning results.

Ah, I think that's a great idea. I'd actually like to add some
stuff directly to the core and/or into TEA somehow that facilitates
some of these bits. There are routines that are so common, we can
really have a few macros to shorten them. I don't want to walk
down the crazy path that Perl XS leads, but simplification is still
possible.

--
Jeff Hobbs, The Tcl Guy
http://www.ActiveState.com/, a division of Sophos

Shaun Deacon

2004-12-18, 12:52 pm

Although I can use a starkit/starpack for collecting together my
application, the interpreter, various docs and utilities into a
single executable 'object'... ultimately, I don't think a starkit
does what I really want :-(

The reason I use 'mktclapp' is to create a single 'closed' binary.

Mktclapp allows me to generate a single C file from my application
tcl sources, custom widget .so/.dll, and icons which can all be
compiled into a binary executable. I also use the C functions that
Ian is referring to bolt in an additional primitive license checker
and the 'shroud' option to prevent, at least, a naive inspection
of the wrapped Tcl strings.

>From searches of previous posts on the list and the wiki it appears
that I cannot 'lock' the starkit/starpack.

BTW, I investigated ProWrap, Freewrap, etc, a while ago and had
various problems - mktclapp was the easiest to use and get working.

If I've misinterpretted starkit/starpacks, please let me know...
cheers
Shaun

Jeff Hobbs

2004-12-21, 4:00 pm

Shaun Deacon wrote:
> The reason I use 'mktclapp' is to create a single 'closed' binary.
>
> Mktclapp allows me to generate a single C file from my application
> tcl sources, custom widget .so/.dll, and icons which can all be
> compiled into a binary executable. I also use the C functions that
> Ian is referring to bolt in an additional primitive license checker
> and the 'shroud' option to prevent, at least, a naive inspection
> of the wrapped Tcl strings.
>
> From searches of previous posts on the list and the wiki it appears
> that I cannot 'lock' the starkit/starpack.
>
> BTW, I investigated ProWrap, Freewrap, etc, a while ago and had
> various problems - mktclapp was the easiest to use and get working.

Lock? If you mean to prevent the user from seeing your source
code, then something like TclApp (the next-gen of prowrap) has
the ability to precompile (obfuscate) your Tcl code. That is
generally all that people worry about. A knowledgeable Tcl user
would still be able to crack open the starkit and see the
structure of the files in it, but not read your Tcl code.

--
Jeff Hobbs, The Tcl Guy
http://www.ActiveState.com/, a division of Sophos

Shaun Deacon

2004-12-21, 8:57 pm

Jeff Hobbs wrote:

> Lock? If you mean to prevent the user from seeing your source
> code, then something like TclApp (the next-gen of prowrap) has
> the ability to precompile (obfuscate) your Tcl code

Yes, this was my main meaning...

However, I was also referring to a previous question on CLT about
'locking a starkit'

Regarding TclApp...IIRC, it was ProWrap that I had most issues
with - it's a long time ago, and I don't remember exactly, but I
suspect my main problems concerned the Tix extension.

So, with TclApp in mind, I have two questions :

1. Does TclApp support Tix ?...I use Tix mega-widgets extensively
in my current applications. In new apps, I will probably dump
Tix in favour of another widget set, but the porting effort for
current apps would be too much.

2. Is TclApp free ?...It appears from the ActiveState site that
the TDK is not freeware.

cheers,
Shaun

--
Shaun Deacon
SOCDEC, Fujitsu Microelectronics America
phone: ++1 408 737 5627 [coins: 7933 75627]
email: sdeacon@fma.fujitsu.com
--

Jeff Hobbs

2004-12-21, 8:57 pm

Shaun Deacon wrote:
> So, with TclApp in mind, I have two questions :
>
> 1. Does TclApp support Tix ?...I use Tix mega-widgets extensively
> in my current applications. In new apps, I will probably dump
> Tix in favour of another widget set, but the porting effort for
> current apps would be too much.

TclApp does not specifically declare supported extensions,
except to say that you must use a stubs-built extension.
If you have a stubs-built Tix, then you can use that. I
know such is possible.

> 2. Is TclApp free ?...It appears from the ActiveState site that
> the TDK is not freeware.

No, it is commercial software, part of TDK (which has a lot
of other tools as well):
http://www.activestate.com/Products/Tcl_Dev_Kit/

--
Jeff Hobbs, The Tcl Guy
http://www.ActiveState.com/, a division of Sophos

Sponsored Links