On 07/04/2016 02:21 PM, Paul Koning wrote: > >> On Jul 4, 2016, at 1:58 PM, Tristan Gingold <tging...@free.fr> wrote: >> I agree. Yes to scripting, but maybe not with tcl. >> (Although it would be better to have a generic scripting infrastructure to >> support any language). > > Generic is fine, but i agree with Patrick that Tcl is a "language" to be > avoided at all costs. Python is good. Note that GDB adopted Python as its > scripting language some time ago after considering a bunch of alternatives. > It has the advantage of substantially cleaner syntax than most if not all > competitors. And yes, embedding it is pretty simple. Note though that there > is some complexity in supporting both Python 2 and Python 3 since the > internals are slightly different, and not as well documented as they ought to > be. (If you want to support only one of the two, make it Python 3.)
Wow, I would not have guessed that this community would have such a strong aversion to Tcl. Is it the syntax? Or the Tcl culture? Are there issues with a particular implementation? I, personally, have no vested interest; it just seemed to fit the design requirements... _______________________________________________ Ghdl-discuss mailing list Ghdl-discuss@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/ghdl-discuss
