Front page | perl.wxperl.users |
Postings from January 2013
> Can you explain what exactly you wanted/needed that was not provided by > wxGlade? Honestly, it's mostly the fact the wxGlade is an SDI application, and my personal preference is for MDI applications. wxGlade also has visual artifacts in the fields in the property window. I also prefer wxFormBuilder's tab-based grouping of components to wxGlade's approach of throwing them all in the main window. wxFormBuilder also presents more components for use. With wxGlade, for example, for your choices in containers, you get wxPanel, wxSplitterWindow, and wxNotebook. wxFormBuilder gives you all those plus wxScrolledWindow, wxAuiNotebook, wxListBook and wxChoiceBook. In general I just found wxFormBuilder much easier to learn, more attractive to use, and the interface more consistent, with more immediate access to object properties. In wxFormBuilder, all the properties are accessible by scrolling down a single object properties frame. wxGlade puts it's properties into 3 tabs, with artifacts in the fields such that you have to click in the field in order to see the value. Bottom-line: wxGlade felt clunky and rough around the edges, while wxFormBuilder felt polished and more consistent. However, it's ultimately an aesthetic choice. While it's true that it's easier to get Perl code from wxGlade than the roundabout method I've described using Padre, I feel the gains I get from designing my interfaces in wxFormBuilder over designing them in wxGlade more than compensate for this. w On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 12:40 PM, Johan Vromans <jvromans@squirrel.nl> wrote: > Wallace Winfrey <wwinfrey@gmail.com> writes: > > > Johan Vromans wrote: > >> I still consider wxGlade --yet another dead end-- a good tool to start > >> wxPerl development > > > > I tried wxGlade, and wxDesigner - neither really seemed to do what I > > wanted/needed. > > Can you explain what exactly you wanted/needed that was not provided by > wxGlade? > > -- Johan >Thread Previous | Thread Next