3 ms·
By "here" I meant my office. Tcl is not elegant, it's simplistic. Just look at the ugly workarounds for language shortcomings like upvar. I'm not saying javasc
by Paul_S 9y ago
By "here" I meant my office.
Tcl is not elegant, it's simplistic. Just look at the ugly workarounds for language shortcomings like upvar. I'm not saying javascript is elegant (is anyone?) but it's less unwieldy, quicker to learn and immediately understandable to a c coder.
- cmacleod4 9y agoPaul_S prefers a language which is "immediately understandable to a c coder" - I think this gets to the heart of the disagreement here. Tcl is different. Anyone who expects it look like and work like C-family languages will always be frustrated and disappointed. But people who are willing to take a less conventional approach may find that it opens up cleaner and more elegant ways of doing things. For example, upvar is not just a workaround - it can support meta-programming techniques which are not even possible in e.g. Python. The "Tcl way" is to have a minimal core which just supports running commands and connecting them together. Everything else is implemented as commands, including the control constructs, and any command can be redefined. This flexibility does of course allow things to go wrong in ways that could not happen in a more restrictive language. But it also provides an adaptability that is hard to give up once you get used to it.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]