Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!dimacs.rutgers.edu!mips!sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ncar!ico!attc!marbru
From: marbru@attc.UUCP (Martin Brunecky)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: Wcl vs. UIL
Message-ID: <1269@attc.UUCP>
Date: 15 Mar 91 03:56:32 GMT
References: <1039@venice.SEDD.TRW.COM> <1237@attc.UUCP> <1991Mar14.164945.8074@convex.com>
Reply-To: marbru@auto-trol.UUCP (Martin Brunecky)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Auto-trol Technology, Denver
Lines: 48

In article <1991Mar14.164945.8074@convex.com> gstiehl@convex.com (Greg Stiehl) writes:
>The UIL compiler adds a level of error checking that you can't get in
>Xcl.  For instance, you could be setting the value of a resource that
>doesn't exist.  While this isn't devistating, it can be very annoying.

    Agreed (though I consider it less anoying than a UIL compiler getting lost
    in the code where I forgot to type a semicolon after a brace: };.
    We'w been thinking about resource files "lint" for a while. The required
    Xrm interfaces, however, are not in R4. Bob Scheifler promises they will
    be in R5 - then we can do it.
>
>Another down side of not compiling Wcl is that you *have* to ship the user
>interface description.  
>
    Not at all. Remeber you can load resource files at your will. If you
    want to hide your UI definition, you can ENCRYPT your resource files
    and decrypt them during the load - and your encryption does not have
    to be too fancy == costly.
    Similarly, people argue that the user can shoot himself by changing
    the resource file. Again, the application can force whatever resources
    are critical to it in so many ways ...
>
>>    - UI definition direct portability (no huge, binary .uid files)
>
>The argument to this *might* be that it costs you at run time, because
>with Wcl the application has to read and parse the resource file(s) at
>run time.  Whereas with UIL, the application reads in a binary file
>that doen't need to be parsed.  Wcl also makes the Xt resource data
>base larger, which could have adverse effect on all widget creations.
>
    The very first thing I did with WsXc 1.0 was a benchmark against
    UIL. To my surprize, Wcl was faster. It did not have to open and
    read those huge .uid files. Naturaly, your milage can/will vary.
    The Xrm database size is an issue, and I hope it willl be adressed
    by R5. However, the Xrm design is already doing lots to minimize an 
    impact of a complex, deep Xrm database structure on widget creation.

    Besides, if you use resource files along with UIL, the same database
    search is used with UIL (plus the all .uid file processing).
    And you have to understand two concepts (UIL and Xrm), and maintain
    your UI component in two totally different files. Grrrrrr

 
-- 
=*= Opinions presented here are solely of my own and not those of Auto-trol =*=
Martin Brunecky                           {...}sunpeaks!auto-trol!marbru
(303) 252-2499                        (sometimes also:  marbru@auto-trol.COM )
Auto-trol Technology Corp. 12500 North Washington St., Denver, CO 80241-2404