I have used both. PerlApp used to require you develop your application on =
a Windows NT machine. Not sure if that is still true? I used it back in =
1999. Perl2exe does not have that limitation. I am currently using =
Perl2exe on Windows 98. I use to compile Perl Win32::GUI applications =
with PerlApp and I would not have to distribute any other files other than =
the executable. However with Perl2exe, I have to distribute perlcrt.dll as =
well for additional runtime support. This is not that big a deal though. =
I just have enduser install that DLL file to the same directory as the =
executable. One thing I did not like about PerlApp is that it created =
subdirectories below /temp where it placed expanded files summing about =
1megabyte each for each executable you ran. Perl2exe does not need to do =
this. Both PerlApp and Perl2exe allow you to compile with a special GUI =
switch so the DOS console is not visible. Executable file sizes are a =
little smaller with Perl2exe I found. Execution speed is similar for your =
compiled programs. But perhaps the biggest drawback to PerlApp was that =
you had to have either a user license or a machine license. Perl2exe does =
not limit you to compiling on one machine, or by one user. I use =
ActiveState Perl binary instead of Indigo Software Perl binary, but I use =
Indigo Software's Perl2exe compiler on ActiveState's perl binary. Works =
just fine. Indigo makes sure it works with ActiveState Perl.=20
I have successfully ran applications compiled under both compilers on =
Windows OS platforms as well as the Novell Network operating system.
Eric Hansen
Dallas, Texas U.S.A.
|
