RE: Tk's lack of "chrome" (prompted by Re: Tk::FunkyButton ?)

.....

> >any of this means in detail. But, since Tk is
> >progressing at a healthy pace, isn't it a better idea
> >to re-write pTk so as to "tie in through Tcl and use
> >Tcl_Obj"?
> 
> Hmm, I suppose that might not be too bad.
> Main downside would be extra memory use and overhead
> converting to/from Tcl_Obj/SV (current perl/Tk fakes a Tcl_Obj 
> object interface as an SV).

Memory consumption, and execution speed, are all twice better in Tcl::Tk
compared to perl/Tk with "overhead" you mentioned. More precisely, memory
wins were lost somewhere in perl/Tk complexity.

See http://perlmonks.org/?node_id=426089

Vadim.
-++**==--++**==--++**==--++**==--++**==--++**==--++**==
This message was posted through the Stanford campus mailing list
server.  If you wish to unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the
message body of "unsubscribe ptk" to [email protected]