Re^2: TK vs. Web pages

Thanks for noticing that. At this point, I'm more concerned with providing a test tool for use by a single QA person.

Currently I use Getopt to allow my user to specify what he needs. Since the tool doesn't get used with great frequency, he always has to specify the help option before he can specify what he needs.

I'd much rather be able to display a set of radio buttons and some scroll boxes so he can see his choices from the outset.

My research turned up references to Tk. Then I started wondering why the standard reference was out of print...

Comment on Re^2: TK vs. Web pages

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: TK vs. Web pages by GrandFather (Saint) on Apr 03, 2007 at 21:04 UTC
In that case Tk is a pretty clear choice. It is light weight for a job such as you describe and the somewhat non-native look doesn't matter at all. Actually you'd probably find you have it knocked out in crude form in an hour if you let pack manage the layout for you. The Tk documentation is ok, but tends to be a bit scattered with some bits in non-obvious places. Important bits to be familiar with are Tk::options, Tk::pack, Tk::Radiobutton, Tk::Text and Tk::Label. If you would like a light weight starting point take a look at Utility to capture parameters and perform a task or Tk Tutorial, Featuring Your Very Own "Perl Sig/OBFU Decoder Ring" for a tutorial that explores a little more of the functionality. DWIM is Perl's answer to Gödel	[reply]
Re^3: TK vs. Web pages by jdporter (Paladin) on Apr 03, 2007 at 14:00 UTC
Since apparently the user is already using a commandline interface, perhaps you should consider a console-based UI approach, e.g. curses?	[reply]
Re^4: TK vs. Web pages by Anonymous Monk on Apr 03, 2007 at 15:06 UTC
Something else for me to check out. I appreciate your comments.	[reply]