In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Delacour)
wrote:
I have exactly the same set-up. The only difference seems to be my
pain threshold :-)
Yes, that whole extra second Mac::Glue takes over osascript can be annoying.
I am only being half-facetious, I know it can be, depending on the context.
But in most cases, it won't be significant.
You may not be aware, but unlike RunAppleScript(), the worst overhead
involved with Mac::Glue is on script startup only, whereas with
RunAppleScript() there will be slowness overhead associated with every call
to the function.
[As a side note: again noting that the delay is entirely in the startup, I
use Mac::Glue a lot in XChat scripts, and they are loaded in once and cached
a la mod_perl, so there is no startup issue. You get immediate results,
just as one would expect from a compiled AppleScript.]
The problem with your routine is that you need to display the dialog
in a process which a) has glue available and b) the user does not
want to activate.
I don't understand the complaint. It's just like yours. Yes, you need a
glue, but that's a one-time operation (% glue /Applications/Terminal);
it's not a big deal. And yours targets the application too; what's the
difference?
Besides that, the user is required to learn a new way of expressing
the terminology rather than simply using the familiar AppleScript way.
You are assuming people on this list are familiar with AppleScript. I make
no such (false) assumption. :)
The routine using Mac::AppleScript seems so much simpler to me
Yes, of this I have no doubt.
and it is possible to display dialogs without leaving the current
application, whether it be Terminal or the editor (at least the one
I'm using).
OK, I think you misunderstood. It works just fine using any app as the
target app, as long as it is scriptable, just like yours.
done no precise timings. Neither method is fast and 3 seconds to me
is an awful long time if you think what that might have taken on a 66
MHz machine.
Three seconds *including clicking Cancel*. So it relies on silly user
interaction, hence the note of the user/sys CPU times. Here's a quick
similarly dumb benchmark that relies on user interaction:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] pudge]$ time osascript -e 'tell app Terminal to choose file
name with prompt test1 default name test2'
real0m1.136s
user0m0.200s
sys 0m0.070s
[EMAIL PROTECTED] pudge]$ time perl -MMac::Glue -e 'my $glue = new Mac::Glue
Terminal; $glue-choose_file_name(with_prompt = test1, default_name =
test2);'
real0m2.398s
user0m1.120s
sys 0m0.210s
Woohoo, I clicked Cancel faster on that run. :) The real number is 0.27
vs. 1.33 there. About a second difference.
use Mac::AppleScript qw(RunAppleScript);
$asresult = RunAppleScript AS;
tell app Terminal
display dialog Enter a number: default answer 55
text returned of result as real
end
AS
print $asresult**2 . $/;
use Mac::Glue;
my $glue = new Mac::Glue 'Terminal';
my $result = $glue-display_dialog('Enter a number:', default_answer = 55);
print $result-{text_returned}**2, \n;
--
Chris Nandor [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://pudge.net/
Open Source Development Network[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://osdn.com/
