Home > Archive > Tcl > March 2004 > Inviting suggestions for TCL interpreter on Windows
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Inviting suggestions for TCL interpreter on Windows
|
|
|
| Hi,
For porting TCL scripts from Unix to Windows 2000, we are looking for
an appropriate TCL interpreter. Our options are:
1. ActiveState :Native port, based on Expect V5.39 and Tcl 8.4+, runs
on XP/NT/2k. Available with support or as part of ASPN Tcl.
2. Gordon Chaffee: http://bmrc.berkeley.edu/people/chaffee/tcltk.html
:Native port, based on Expect V5.21
The first option will make us buy the Expect utility from ActiveState.
The second option is a beta release and nothing is known about its
stability.
Can you suggest which one to go for?
If you have any idea about the robustness of the second TCL
interpreter, please let me know.
Thanks
| |
| Michael Schlenker 2004-03-27, 12:26 am |
| Yash wrote:
> Hi,
> For porting TCL scripts from Unix to Windows 2000, we are looking for
> an appropriate TCL interpreter. Our options are:
> 1. ActiveState :Native port, based on Expect V5.39 and Tcl 8.4+, runs
> on XP/NT/2k. Available with support or as part of ASPN Tcl.
> 2. Gordon Chaffee: http://bmrc.berkeley.edu/people/chaffee/tcltk.html
> :Native port, based on Expect V5.21
>
> The first option will make us buy the Expect utility from ActiveState.
> The second option is a beta release and nothing is known about its
> stability.
> Can you suggest which one to go for?
> If you have any idea about the robustness of the second TCL
> interpreter, please let me know.
2. Abandonware mostly, based on a highly customized Tcl 8.0 from years
ago, without unicode support and all the other goodies.
If you have the money go for the recent port.
Michael
| |
| Cameron Laird 2004-03-27, 12:26 am |
| In article <c3ush3$2cljdf$1@ID-102549.news.uni-berlin.de>,
Michael Schlenker <schlenk@uni-oldenburg.de> wrote:
>Yash wrote:
>
>2. Abandonware mostly, based on a highly customized Tcl 8.0 from years
>ago, without unicode support and all the other goodies.
>
>If you have the money go for the recent port.
>
>Michael
.... and if you don't have the modest money, evaluate whether
your use of Expect is essential. Many people reasonably use
Expect for a few simple functions--telnetting, for example--
that are not *too* difficult to automate in pure-Tcl. With
Expect easily available, it makes sense to use Expect. If
Expect is harder to come by, a good solution might be differ-
ent, but not hard.
--
Cameron Laird <claird@phaseit.net>
Business: http://www.Phaseit.net
|
|
|
|
|