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!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!gatech!swrinde!sgiblab!brunix!cs!rv
From: rv@cslab6b.cs.brown.edu (rodrigo vanegas)
Subject: Re: Why you should not use Tcl
In-Reply-To: probert@ucsb.edu's message of 25 Sep 1994 21:07:02 GMT
Message-ID: <RV.94Sep25192903@cslab6b.cs.brown.edu>
Sender: news@cs.brown.edu
Organization: Brown University Department of Computer Science
References: <9409232314.AA29957@mole.gnu.ai.mit.edu> <CwnB57.GvH@twwells.com>
	<19940924T224042Z.erik@naggum.no> <364opm$fiu@yuggoth.ucsb.edu>
Date: Sun, 25 Sep 1994 23:29:03 GMT
Lines: 28
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu gnu.misc.discuss:18244 comp.lang.tcl:19232 comp.lang.scheme:9867

In article <364opm$fiu@yuggoth.ucsb.edu> probert@ucsb.edu (Dave Probert) writes:

   But why not let RMS have the burden of defending his opinions rather than
   attacking those who challenge them?  He is obviously not shy.

   Perhaps you don't see Stallman's remarks as politicking, but if it was not
   his intention to discourage use of TCL, then what was his purpose?

To encourage the design, implementation, and use of superior extension
languages.  The reason this was expressed by discouraging the use of
TCL is that if TCL becomes too popular then we'll all be forced to use
it in the effort to be compatible.  I think the idea is to switch to a
better tool while TCL is still growing and not yet a de facto
standard.  As for what is a better tool, this depends on what you
want.  See the following recent post for a good analysis.

  <CONNOLLY.94Sep25115651@austin2.hal.com>

Note that TCL is still sometimes the only tool for the job.  Let's
hope this doesn't remain the case for long.  Also, don't get so worked
up about RMS.  Complaining about the style of his post if like
complaining about Reagan for his occasional quips about the evil
empire.  Whatever...


rodrigo vanegas
rv@cs.brown.edu

