Bonkers

[muppet]

On May 13, 2007, at 11:32 AM, Aaron Trevena wrote:

> On 12/05/07, muppet <scott at asofyet.org> wrote:
>>
>> <plug intensity="shameless">But why did you do it in C when we have
>> Gtk2 in perl?</plug>
>>
>> http://gtk2-perl.sf.net/
>> http://search.cpan.org/~tsch/Gtk2-1.144/Gtk2.pm
>
> Because the C is documented, and even has a handy Book. Last time I
> looked most the  Perl GTK docs referred you to the C docs.

That's mostly because of the desire not to duplicate the  
documentation effort.  I'd considered once writing something to  
scrape the docs from the C sources and munge them into perldoc in an  
automated fashion; however, it would either require somebody  
remembering to do it, or require the end user to have a copy of gtk 
+'s C source on hand, both of which are doomed to failure.

Bleh, when i started with the old gtk-perl, i was over a year into it  
before i discovered that docs existed for the perl binding.


> Doing it in C first made doing it with Perl much easier though.

I actually use the Gtk2-Perl manpages for developing with gtk+ in any  
language, because they are very handy.  But then, i already have some  
clue what the functions do, and only need a reminder of their  
signatures.  That's also what makes me a poor choice for the  
documentation writer -- my sense of obviousness is skewed.


--
One, two, free, four, five, six, sebben, eight, nine, ten, elebben,  
twull, fourteen, sickteen, sebbenteen, eightteen, elebbenteen,  
fiffeen, elebbenteen!
   -- Zella, aged three, counting to twenty.