2007-12-26 HE This days I tried tcl/tk 8.5 the first time. Here my experiences with 8.5.0 on Windows XP with eTcl.
:-) nice, good, I like it; :-| neutral; :-( not so good, I don't like it, makes additional work:
Here is some example code demonstrating a ttk checkbutton's tristate display.
checkbutton .c1 -variable c1 -onvalue a -offvalue b -tristatevalue c
ttk::checkbutton .c2 -variable c2 -onvalue a -offvalue b
pack .c1 .c2 -side left
set c1 a ;# .c1 checked (on)
set c1 b ;# .c1 unchecked (off)
set c1 c ;# .c1 checked with grey background (tristate)
set c2 a ;# .c2 checked (on)
set c2 b ;# .c2 unchecked (off)
unset c2 ;# .c2 checked with fill-dot check (tristate) [JH] - as noted above time {foreach {a b c} [list de da lus] {break}} 1000
2.396 microseconds per iteration
time {lassign [list de da lus] a b c} 1000
1.632 microseconds per iteration proc a {} {
foreach {a b c} [list de da lus] {break}
return
}
proc b {} {
lassign [list de da lus] a b c
return
}
time {a} 1000
1.643 microseconds per iteration
time {b} 1000
1.234 microseconds per iteration (ian) 53 % time {a} 100000
1.12969 microseconds per iteration
(ian) 54 % time {b} 100000
1.02071 microseconds per iteration.t configure -font "[.t cget -font] bold"
.t configure tag configure title -font "[.t cget -font] bold"
proc cgetFont {win} {
set font [$win cget -font]
if {[llength $font] == 1} {
set font [font configure $font]
}
return $font
}
.t configure -font "[cgetFont $::ausgabe] -weight bold".t configure tag configure title -font "[cgetFont $::ausgabe] -weight bold"
.t config -font [concat [font actual [.t cget -font]] -weight bold]
ttk::treeview .t -show tree
pack .t -fill both -expand 1
.t insert {} end -id 1 -text de
.t insert 1 end -id 3 -text da
.t insert 1 end -id 4 -text lus
.t insert 4 end -id 5 -text ika
.t insert 4 end -id 6 -text rus
.t insert {} end -id 2 -text fooThis are my personal first impression. And it covers only a small part of the new features.
AM This seems a good place to add a link to Mark Roseman's overview of Tcl/Tk 8.5: [L1 ]
2007-12-26 HE Some new impression:
time {if {[lsearch -exact [list de da lus] {da}]!=-1} {}} 1000
1.134 microseconds per iteration
time {if {{da} in [list de da lus]} {}} 1000
0.701 microseconds per iteration
proc c {} {
if {[lsearch -exact [list de da lus] {da}]!=-1} {}
return
}
proc d {} {
if {{da} in [list de da lus]} {}
return
}
time {c} 1000
1.417 microseconds per iteration
time {d} 1000
1.05 microseconds per iteration
time {if {[lsearch -exact [list de da lus] {da}]==-1} {}} 1000
1.132 microseconds per iteration
time {if {{da} ni [list de da lus]} {}} 1000
0.695 microseconds per iteration
proc c {} {
if {[lsearch -exact [list de da lus] {da}]==-1} {}
return
}
proc d {} {
if {{da} ni [list de da lus]} {}
return
}
time {c} 1000
1.487 microseconds per iteration
time {d} 1000
1.05 microseconds per iteration unset n
time {if {![info exists n]} {set n 0};incr n} 1000
0.678 microseconds per iteration
unset n
time {if {![info exists n]} {set n 1} else {incr n}} 1000
0.655 microseconds per iteration
unset n
time {incr n}
8 microseconds per iteration
unset n
proc e {} {
if {![info exists n]} {set n 0};incr n
return
}
proc f {} {
if {![info exists n]} {set n 1} else {incr n}
return
}
proc g {} {
incr n
return
}
time {e} 1000
0.921 microseconds per iteration
time {f} 1000
0.803 microseconds per iteration
time {g} 1000
1.864 microseconds per iterationIDG Dec. 28, 2007. tk_messageBox seems to use ttk buttons by default. This is ... surprising. Is there a simple way to cause reversion to the traditional look?
HE It looks like you are using a unix-like system. On this platforms tk_messageBox is mapped on tk::MessageBox (file lib\tk8.5\msgbox.tcl distributed but not used by tcl/tk on w32 systems). I don't know if someone would change this file to use no ttk-widgets. If you don't need the new parameter -detail, you can get an older version of the file msgbox.tcl from sourceforge [L2 ] and replace the original file in your installation. If you can't change your installation you can source this file into your scripts. On w32 systems you also need to run
proc ::tk_messageBox {args} {
return [tk::MessageBox {*}$args]
}DKF: Or just run tk::MessageBox directly.
IDG It appears that that also uses themed buttons. There is no problem with new code. There may be a problem when old apps look different, and users don't like it. I thought the general philosophy with ttk in 8.5 was that you should get the old widgets unless you specifically asked for the new...
IDG Also tk_dialog seems to use unthemed buttons on Linux. Shouldn't tk_dialog and tk_messageBox be consistent in appearance?
HE This is my understanding too. But looking inside shows something different:
The default dialogs (used on unix-like systems in the files tkfbox.tcl, msgbox.tcl ...) using ttk-widgets but existing in namespace tk. This looks like a compromise between compatibility and platform look and feel. From my point of view it was better to use standard widgets for standard dialogs in namespace tk. If their is the need for theming dialogs, it is possible to create a second set (like the second set of widgets) in the namespace ttk.
More annoying: What sense makes packages if they are always loaded? Defining packages means for me loading code on demand not always.
I changed msgbox.tcl so it works without ttk-widgets. On XP it looks perfect. No need for the use of theming widgets. At least for me.
I think (and hope) their was a lot of discussions about this in the past. So I will try to live with this situation.
EB find this discussion funny. HE I woun't discuss. This are only my impressions. While ttk is an effort to make people stop saying Tk looks ugly, you are complaining on users of old applications who don't like it. HE I actually experienced just this in the company I'm working. Not with tk. But with changed look&feel. More in detail: The screenshot in documantation looks different as the application. This costs time to explain and change the documentation. Let the programmer the choice about the look & feel. It's easier to respect this in new scripts/application then changing the old one. Personaly, I find ttk is a big step forward. HE This is my meaning too. Not perfect but a big step I don't know one person (Tcl'er or not) saying Tk is worse than before. HE I never wrote this All my developments are done with 8.4/Tile since long time now, and a lot of people are surprised that it is written in Tcl/Tk. HE I got this reaction in the past even without Tile.
About the package require, anyway, all the ttk code is now in the tk library. And also note that Tk require msgcat.
I am not sure this is the right place. I am a newbie to TCL (did some RealBasic many years ago) and I like to start programming again. Looked at TCL and installed ActiveTCL 8.5.0. To my suprise the demo>TK demo's are not working after a default install! I get an message saying "invalid command name mcset" and then some? Has anybody any idea what this means? -- JAR. RS Yes: you are probably in a locale, for which the message catalog is still in the old format (using mcset instead of ::msgcat::mcset). The files by language are in lib/tcl8.5/msgs. Thanks for your response. Changing the the contents of nl.msg in the ..\lib\tk85\demos directory(change mcset with ::msgcat::mcset) made the demo work. -- JAR.
JOB Tried out tk::treeview as a candidate for a replacement of the BWidget Tree object.
My 1st impressions so far: Tk8.5 looks very promising, especially anti-aliasing+ttk::* looks great... Although, existing programs 'll probably need a lot of rework to be prepared for ttk::* and style.
2008-01-29 HE
if {![info exists files($el)]} {
set n 1
} else {
incr n
} if {[catch {
incr n
} ret]} { #some reaction)2008-01-29 FB