Convert perl/ cgi web app to standalone perl app
 

I have a perl/cgi web application, running on ana pache server.
The web application has radiobuttons, textfields, combo boxes, submit
buttons etc.
I want to write a standalone perl version. Can this be done and if so
how ?

Thanks.

Re: Convert perl/ cgi web app to standalone perl app
 

learnerplates wrote:
> I have a perl/cgi web application, running on ana pache server.
> The web application has radiobuttons, textfields, combo boxes, submit
> buttons etc.
> I want to write a standalone perl version. Can this be done

Yes, can't see why not.

But why do you want to do it?

> and if so how ?

By replacing the CGI parameters with command line arguments, change the
code for parsing CGI data to parse arguments, and modify the code for
generating output.

--
Gunnar Hjalmarsson
Email: http://www.gunnar.cc/cgi-bin/contact.pl

Re: Convert perl/ cgi web app to standalone perl app
 

learnerplates wrote:
> I have a perl/cgi web application, running on ana pache server.
> The web application has
> I want to write a standalone perl version. Can this be done and if so
> how ?

Perl/Tk allows you to write apps with GUI widgets such as "radiobuttons,
textfields, combo boxes, submit buttons etc."

Re: Convert perl/ cgi web app to standalone perl app
 

On 2005-06-07, Ian Wilson scribbled these
curious markings:
> Perl/Tk allows you to write apps with GUI widgets such as "radiobuttons,
> textfields, combo boxes, submit buttons etc."

As does Perl/GTK+, and it won't make your eyes bleed like Tk will.

Best Regards,
Christopher Nehren
--
I abhor a system designed for the "user", if that word is a coded
pejorative meaning "stupid and unsophisticated". -- Ken Thompson
If you ask the wrong people questions, you get "Joel on Software".
Unix is user friendly. However, it isn't idiot friendly.

Re: Convert perl/ cgi web app to standalone perl app
 

Christopher Nehren wrote:

> On 2005-06-07, Ian Wilson scribbled these
> curious markings:
>> Perl/Tk allows you to write apps with GUI widgets such as
>> "radiobuttons, textfields, combo boxes, submit buttons etc."
>
> As does Perl/GTK+, and it won't make your eyes bleed like Tk will.

I have experience with WxWidgets, which I didn't like much. How does it
compare with GTK+?

--
John Small Perl scripts: http://johnbokma.com/perl/
Perl programmer available: http://castleamber.com/
Happy Customers: http://castleamber.com/testimonials.html

Re: Convert perl/ cgi web app to standalone perl app
 

On 2005-06-08, John Bokma scribbled these
curious markings:
> I have experience with WxWidgets, which I didn't like much. How does it
> compare with GTK+?

[This is really becoming off-topic for this group, but I'm not sure of
where to redirect the discussion; comp.linux.development.apps or
whatever it is doesn't make sense, since at least I'm not using Linux,
and neither Perl or GTK+ are Linux-specific.]

WxWidgets uses the GTK+ widget set on Unix systems to do the actual
rendering, but that's where the similarities end. I've found GTK+ to be
a much simpler, more intuitive interface to GUI development than WxPerl.
For example, you aren't *absolutely positively required* to subclass
from anything to write Perl/GTK+ applications. It's OO, in a language
that supports OO (which is more than can be said for plain C/GTK+), but
not the sort that forces one particular programming style on you[1].
Perl/GTK+ allows you to follow normal Perl practises: make a window
object, add some widgets to it, optionally add signal handlers, show it,
enter the main event loop. You don't need to derive from a class to do
anything, but you can if you want (and it's necessary if you want to
extend a widget's behaviour). For a simple, working example, read the
very top of Gtk2.pm's POD in the Gtk2 module.

[1]: I'm sure that the Wx developers had at least one very good reason
for doing things that way; it just doesn't fit me all that well.

Best Regards,
Christopher Nehren
--
I abhor a system designed for the "user", if that word is a coded
pejorative meaning "stupid and unsophisticated". -- Ken Thompson
If you ask the wrong people questions, you get "Joel on Software".
Unix is user friendly. However, it isn't idiot friendly.

GUI libraries for Perl (was Re: Convert perl/ cgi web app to standalone perl app)
 

Christopher Nehren wrote:

> On 2005-06-08, John Bokma scribbled these
> curious markings:
>> I have experience with WxWidgets, which I didn't like much. How does
>> it compare with GTK+?
>
> [This is really becoming off-topic for this group,

Nope, it's about GUI libraries for Perl, which I consider on-topic :-D

> WxWidgets uses the GTK+ widget set on Unix systems to do the actual
> rendering, but that's where the similarities end.

Yes, and Windows API for Windows :-) But it looks almost as ugly as Tk
(on Windows).

> I've found GTK+ to be
> a much simpler, more intuitive interface to GUI development than
> WxPerl. For example, you aren't *absolutely positively required* to
> subclass from anything to write Perl/GTK+ applications. It's OO, in a
> language that supports OO (which is more than can be said for plain
> C/GTK+), but not the sort that forces one particular programming style
> on you[1].

For Wx I found the documentation hard, incomplete, etc. I had to guess a
lot, and experiment a lot, two things that I don't consider part of
programming. I had no problem with *you have to subclass*, but I can
imagine that the forcing can be annoying for small things. (I don't like
force either, life will find a way :-D ).

> Perl/GTK+ allows you to follow normal Perl practises: make a window
> object, add some widgets to it, optionally add signal handlers, show
> it, enter the main event loop. You don't need to derive from a class
> to do anything, but you can if you want (and it's necessary if you
> want to extend a widget's behaviour). For a simple, working example,
> read the very top of Gtk2.pm's POD in the Gtk2 module.

But how good is the documentation? With Wx, there are plenty of
extremely simple examples, but I had a hard time to do real work based
on the samples.

Thanks,

--
John Small Perl scripts: http://johnbokma.com/perl/
Perl programmer available: http://castleamber.com/
Happy Customers: http://castleamber.com/testimonials.html

Re: GUI libraries for Perl (was Re: Convert perl/ cgi web app to standalone perl app)
 

On 2005-06-08, John Bokma scribbled these
curious markings:
> But how good is the documentation? With Wx, there are plenty of
> extremely simple examples, but I had a hard time to do real work based
> on the samples.

The API references are automatically generated, at least when last I
checked. The C API documentation helps a lot, and is excellent.

I personally believe that the best way for one to evaluate a package is
to try it. You can download the Gtk2 module from CPAN or SourceForge.

Best Regards,
Christopher Nehren
--
I abhor a system designed for the "user", if that word is a coded
pejorative meaning "stupid and unsophisticated". -- Ken Thompson
If you ask the wrong people questions, you get "Joel on Software".
Unix is user friendly. However, it isn't idiot friendly.

Re: GUI libraries for Perl (was Re: Convert perl/ cgi web app to standalone perl app)
 

Christopher Nehren wrote:

> On 2005-06-08, John Bokma scribbled these
> curious markings:
>> But how good is the documentation? With Wx, there are plenty of
>> extremely simple examples, but I had a hard time to do real work based
>> on the samples.
>
> The API references are automatically generated, at least when last I
> checked. The C API documentation helps a lot, and is excellent.
>
> I personally believe that the best way for one to evaluate a package is
> to try it.

I agree, but since I already have some understanding of Wx I was wondering
if it's worth to evaluate Gtk. It has been on my todo list for months, so
any excuse to speed up evaluation is ok :-D. On the other hand, if several
people say it's not worth it, I leave it on the list.

--
John Small Perl scripts: http://johnbokma.com/perl/
Perl programmer available: http://castleamber.com/
Happy Customers: http://castleamber.com/testimonials.html