Code Comments
Programming Forum and web based access to our favorite programming groups.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 --
Post Follow-up to this messageShaun 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
Post Follow-up to this messageJeff 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 --
Post Follow-up to this message"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 ***
Post Follow-up to this messageIan 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
Post Follow-up to this messageJeff 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 ***
Post Follow-up to this messageIan Gay wrote: > '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
Post Follow-up to this messageAlthough 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
Post Follow-up to this messageShaun 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
Post Follow-up to this messageJeff 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 --
Post Follow-up to this messagePowered by vBulletin
Copyright 2000-2006 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.