Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!unsvax!jimi!cleanhead.cs.unlv.edu!maniac
From: maniac@cleanhead.cs.unlv.edu (Eric J. Schwertfeger)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech
Subject: TCL questions
Keywords: TCL AREXX
Message-ID: <1585@jimi.cs.unlv.edu>
Date: 9 Mar 90 21:36:27 GMT
References: <1778@crash.cts.com>
Sender: news@jimi.cs.unlv.edu
Reply-To: maniac@cleanhead.cs.unlv.edu (Eric J. Schwertfeger)
Organization: UNLV Computer Science and Electrical Engineering
Lines: 21


	I have a few questions to ask about TCL, and a few possibly 
invalid observations to make.  First of all, is there any way to get
a copy of the paper that describes TCL?  I'd like to see it to get
a better idea of what it is cabable of.
	Second, it is my impression that programs with TCL interfaces
talk directly to each other, rather than through an intermediate, as with
ARexx.  While this is good as far as speed goes, I do see one limitation
to this.  I'm currently working on a mini-database with an ARexx interface,
and my script interpreter will pass any unknown functions to ARexx, much
like DME does.  Now, I don't have to know which host or library defined
the function, so long as the library or host has been identified to ARexx
as such.  Can this be done with TCL?
	Finally, I don't see why somebody couldn't write a set of 
library functions to implement a command interpreter similar to that 
of TCL.  Two functions to add and remove commands, and one or more to
do the actual stuff of checking the message port, etc.
	I am interested in TCL, but for now I think I'll stick with ARexx. 


Eric Schwertfeger, maniac@jimi.CS.UNLV.EDU