> > 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). > > Tristan.
I agree with that. Here is my point. TCL can certainly easily become a nightmare, but it depends on the application. GHDL lives very well without scripting, so the needs are probably light. In terms of number of commands to implement and complexity of those, I mean. The presence of TCL is still very strong in the EDA world, and seriously switching to anything else is't going to happen soon, so TCL is somewhat unavoidable. I'm just wondering, if support of TCL + Python is needed/wanted, how should that be implemented, point of view of link to TCL/Python runtimes? 99% of times the interpreters won't be used, so I would hate to see a hard link. Plugins then? That implies something generic to plug command interpreters, linked to Tristan statement. I don't really know the solution, as I'm not GHDL developer... Regards, Adrien _______________________________________________ Ghdl-discuss mailing list Ghdl-discuss@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/ghdl-discuss
