Home     |     .Net Programming    |     cSharp Home    |     Sql Server Home    |     Javascript / Client Side Development     |     Ajax Programming

Ruby on Rails Development     |     Perl Programming     |     C Programming Language     |     C++ Programming     |     IT Jobs

Python Programming Language     |     Laptop Suggestions?    |     TCL Scripting     |     Fortran Programming     |     Scheme Programming Language


 
 
Cervo Technologies
The Right Source to Outsource

MS Dynamics CRM 3.0

TCL(Tool Command Language) Scripting

Is there a dedicated TclDevKit forum?


Hi,

I have installed a trial licence of TclDevKit and have a couple of
questions. I wonder if I can post them here or not?

here goes ......

1. Will TclDevKit ever compile Incr Tcl source?
2. Do I need to be able to compile in order to make a starkit/
starpack.

I tend to write all my apps in Incr Tcl and if I am unable to deploy
easily then I question my need for TclDevKit. (Even tho I like the
debugger.)

mets

On Jun 6, 12:16 pm, mets <tony_mett@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,

> I have installed a trial licence of TclDevKit and have a couple of
> questions. I wonder if I can post them here or not?

ActiveState has a mailing list specifically for Tcl Developer's Kit.
You are more likely to get questions answered by the TDK developers by
mailing there.

mets wrote:
> Hi,

> I have installed a trial licence of TclDevKit and have a couple of
> questions. I wonder if I can post them here or not?

> here goes ......

> 1. Will TclDevKit ever compile Incr Tcl source?
> 2. Do I need to be able to compile in order to make a starkit/
> starpack.

Answer to number two is no, you do not have to compile.

> ...

--
+--------------------------------+---------------------------------------+
| Gerald W. Lester                                                       |
|"The man who fights for his ideals is the man who is alive." - Cervantes|
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+

mets wrote:
> I have installed a trial licence of TclDevKit and have a couple of
> questions. I wonder if I can post them here or not?

You are welcome to post them here, but unfortunately my usenet feed gets
poorer by the year (many ISPs don't seem to value usenet anymore).

> 1. Will TclDevKit ever compile Incr Tcl source?
> 2. Do I need to be able to compile in order to make a starkit/
> starpack.

> I tend to write all my apps in Incr Tcl and if I am unable to deploy
> easily then I question my need for TclDevKit. (Even tho I like the
> debugger.)

You do not need to compile anything for starpacks.  ActiveTcl includes
basekits, and most other tclkits will work as well.  As to question 1,
what is really being asked?  You can properly wrap itcl sources without
problem, and they can also be bytecode precompiled by tclcompiler, but
otherwise there is no need to "compile" itcl source, as itcl is a
standard extension in ActiveTcl.

Jeff

On 6 Jun, 18:55, Jeff Hobbs <j@activestate.com> wrote:

I see now that the 'wrapper' is not dependant on the 'compiler'ed tcl
source.
Maybe I need to read the docs more thouroughly, but I came across this
note and thought 'Hmmm'

>Tcl Dev Kit Compiler has these limitations:

>[incr Tcl] code is not compiled.
>Bodies of dynamically created procedures cannot be compiled.
>Procedures within the scope of namespace eval are not compiled

I really like the idea of keeping the source secure.

mets wrote:
> I see now that the 'wrapper' is not dependant on the 'compiler'ed tcl
> source.
> Maybe I need to read the docs more thouroughly, but I came across this
> note and thought 'Hmmm'

>> Tcl Dev Kit Compiler has these limitations:

>> [incr Tcl] code is not compiled.
>> Bodies of dynamically created procedures cannot be compiled.
>> Procedures within the scope of namespace eval are not compiled

> I really like the idea of keeping the source secure.

OK, that part is correct, although the wording can be confusing.
Switching between compiling, precompilation and bytecode obfuscation ...
while the itcl code does get compiled, it is not fully obfuscated, not
in the sense that each proc becomes a stream of indecipherable
bytecodes.  This is done in part, but introspection will still reveal
public method bodies.  Unfortunately the design of itcl does not make
this part easy to fix.

Jeff

On Jun 8, 5:23 pm, Jeff Hobbs <j@activestate.com> wrote:

If you want full obfuscation, just write it in Perl. :)
Add to del.icio.us | Digg this | Stumble it | Powered by Megasolutions Inc