On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 12:33:42PM +0200, Øyvind Harboe wrote: > The key merit I'm evaluating this on is whether it would take > a lot of time for me to do. :-) > > I've already used & implemented Lua, but I couldn't get engineers > to work up the interest in it. Tcl turned out to be easier. Tcl is > a really sick language btw. :-) > > The fact that Lua is used for games gives it excellent numbers, > but considering the openocd user demography tcl could well > be ahead anyway.
My last experience with Tcl was about 10 years ago when I worked for a company which embedded it in a largish product. It turned out to be a bad choice for two reasons (IIRC after 10 years): - Tcl is "a really sick language" :-) (e.g. difficult quoting rules) - but the Tcl interpreter was not helpful at all in pointing out errors to the programmer, especially for missing quotes and brackets Just imagine if gcc wouldn't give you warnings and error messages but just abort if there is a problem... We then switched to Python which gave us detailed tracebacks and error messages, and productivity and developer happyness increased significantly. Does Tcl nowadays do better in this respect? Is Tcl friendly and helpful to developers? Johannes _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
