3 ms·
It's unfortunate that people who dont "get" Tcl feel forced to use it because they are in EDA. I used to have the opposite problem. My employer would not allow
by cmacleod4 2y ago
It's unfortunate that people who dont "get" Tcl feel forced to use it because they are in EDA.
I used to have the opposite problem. My employer would not allow me to write anything mission-critical in Tcl because they thought other people would not be able to maintain it. But now that I'm retired I can write as much Tcl as I like, which is quite a lot :-)
- oldlaptop 2y agoFrom the (little) I've seen of that world, I'm not sure the EDA vendors understand Tcl very well either; I wouldn't want to work with scripts for Cadence's schematic capture tool, and that's not because of Tcl, it's because their scripting interface is a disaster. (Exposing C++ iterators at the script level, for example.)
- vFunct 2y agoIronically the schematic capture scripts were likely written in SKILL (LISP-like language) and not TCL. SKILL is much better than TCL for data processing. TCL's strength is in command control flow.
- IshKebab 2y agoI "get" TCL - it's a neat hack. Arguably even an elegant hack. I can see how it would be fun to play with, in the same way that BASIC was. But most of my work isn't playing and I don't want it to be built on hacks.