>> The question though at the back of everyone's mind might be: will >> this go the same way as PerlTK? I mean by that, PTK was fantastic, >> with Nick I-S putting an awsome amount of work into it, but in the >> end it wasn't supported continually on all 3 major platforms, so it >> became sort of side-lined to the point where you can use it on *nix >> but not easily anywhere else (please correct me if I'm wrong here). >> Now we have wxPerl at what looks like a mature stage, and can we >> learn from history and ensure it survives long enough to build up a >> solid core of users? > > > I guess that comes down to the author. If the Perl TK author has > abandoned (for some definition thereof) Windows and Mac, then I can > only suggest trying to help out with it. please do not go this hard way of supporting perl/Tk. Sane approach is to use Tcl/Tk with a lightweight bridge module. This sane approach is used by Python, Ruby, etc. Otherwise you'll always be several steps back compared to other users. > > Additionally, I think Wx, because it at least uses the native GUI > toolkit, will be more likely to stay maintained. Obviously, WxPerl also connects to external library, unlike perl/Tk, which slurps GUI lib into extension. Besides, Tcl/Tk also has possibility of using native widgets. Best regards, Vadim.