Re: [9fans] Limbo Tk FAQ?

[Lucio De Re <lucio@proxima.alt.za>]

On Thu, May 24, 2001 at 01:29:54PM +0100, forsyth@vitanuova.com wrote:
> 
> i thought the Inferno implementation was tidier.
> 
I like Tcl, personally, as an unstructured programming language
and find the artifice of submitting tk commands to a specialised
inner interpreter quite at odds with its usability.  That is the
way perl and python use tk, too, isn't it?

I really find it silly to use a tcl-like environment and not have
tcl's most useful features avaiable.  But then tcl is one of my
preferences for both simple and complex programming tasks.  Brent
Welch's web server based on tcl is one of the most inspired and
inspiring tools I've had occasion to work with.  A real *tool*,
not just another application.

I find tcl far from perfect but it sure beats awk and perl hands
down.  Rc might be better as an embeddable command language, but
some of the weirder concepts in tcl, like "upvar" and "uplevel"
are quite hard to simulate in any other programming environment.
And they make all the difference in embeddable applications (like
adding posgresql _and_ LDAP to the web server).

And while on that tack, I think Dave Presotto mentioned looking at
"expect", has anyone got some idea how to implement something like
expect without PTYs?  I get the impression from Don Libes' book
that it is possible, but the results would be unsatisfactory, yet
there has to be a Plan 9 concept that can be used as a generic
"data entry" device.  I must confess I have not searched very
carefully, but nothing comes to _my_ mind...

++L