Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.lang.tcl,comp.lang.scheme
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!MathWorks.Com!news.duke.edu!eff!wariat.org!malgudi.oar.net!chemabs!lwv26
From: lwv26@chemabs.uucp (Larry W. Virden)
Subject: Re: Why you should not use Tcl
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Message-ID: <1994Sep28.114315.25413@chemabs.uucp>
Followup-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.lang.tcl,comp.lang.scheme
Reply-To: lvirden@cas.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
Organization: Nedriv Software and Shoe Shiners, Uninc.
References: <9409232314.AA29957@mole.gnu.ai.mit.edu> <CONNOLLY.94Sep25115651@austin2.hal.com> <BEVAN.94Sep27074521@panther.cs.man.ac.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 1994 11:43:15 GMT
Lines: 16
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu gnu.misc.discuss:18460 comp.lang.tcl:19503 comp.lang.scheme:10051


Actually, there has been no real need for another implementation of
Tcl before about a year ago.  That's when some folk began a Tcl like
implementation called Rush, which focuses on compilation improvements.

Exactly what advantages does one get from all the various Scheme
implementations?  Is that just one's way of providing support for
various constructs?  If so, then perhaps this is just a terminology thing -
Tcl could be said to have several hundred implementations - that's
an approximation of the number of extensions that are available for
Tcl.
-- 
:s Great net resources sought...
:s Larry W. Virden                 INET: lvirden@cas.org
:s <URL:http://www.mps.ohio-state.edu/cgi-bin/hpp?lvirden_sig.html>
The task of an educator should be to irrigate the desert not clear the forest.
