4 ms·

I would argue that Tcl is almost "bicameral" in the OP's sense. The application of the "dodekalogue" rules - https://wiki.tcl-lang.org/page/Dodekalogue https:/

I would argue that Tcl is almost "bicameral" in the OP's sense. The application of the "dodekalogue" rules - https://wiki.tcl-lang.org/page/Dodekalogue https://wiki.tcl-lang.org/page/Dodekalogue - largely corresponds to the "Reader". It goes further in that it also specifies substitution and evaluation rules, but it is similar in that it only applies a few basic structural rules, and knows nothing about the specifics of individual commands. Tcl's equivalent of the "Parser" is built-in to each command, which decides whether to interpret its arguments as data, code, option flags, etc.. I suspect this division of responsibilities is very helpful for metaprogramming techniques.

wduquette 2y ago
This is true. In Lisp terms every TCL command is effectively a special form, and can do whatever it pleases with its arguments. On the other hand, TCL provides much less support for building up the string to be evaluated if it's more complex than a single command; and even for a single command it can be tricky.