I tend to agree. I am just finishing up a tool I'm using to automate a bunch of interactions I have with the 4 USB UARTs on my desk and I ended up going with ex

I tend to agree. I am just finishing up a tool I'm using to automate a bunch of interactions I have with the 4 USB UARTs on my desk and I ended up going with expect. If I knew about pexpect I would have probably used that. However, since I did use expect and spent some time learning Tcl, I actually did appreciate one useful thing about it. It's very easy for me to in-line Tcl code into, say, a configuration, parse it with the help of `[info complete]`, attach it to a list and then expand that list `{*}$some_list` as an argument to `expect` or `interact`. I can now have UART specific macros that are bound to keystrokes like Ctrl-t x. Sure I could do something like that in python, but it probably wouldn't be as clear-cut as: # Fix terminal row/col height for less, vi, etc # type Ctrl-t r bind[r] = { # depends on xterm size info, may not be universal send "\{ " send {old=$(stty -g);} send {stty raw -echo min 0 time 5;} send {printf '\033[18t' > /dev/tty;} send {IFS=';t' read -r _ rows cols _ < /dev/tty;} send {stty "$old";} send {stty cols "$cols" rows "$rows";} send {unset old cols rows;} send {shopt -s checkwinsize;} send {clear;} send " \}\r" }