Q: perl vs Tcl: complementary, orthogonal or competition? 
Author Message
 Q: perl vs Tcl: complementary, orthogonal or competition?

In selecting a scripting language to substitute for/improve on .csh et al., I
encounter two pervasive tools: perl and tcl.

After quickly browsing documentation for both, it seems that perl contains
a somewhat richer function set that does tcl. It almost seems as though tcl
provides more of a framework for constructing scripts/tools, while perl provides
a rich set of specific low level tools (e.g. direct access to unix like file
operations, IPC operations et al.)

Is this a fair assesment?

Are these tools considered by most to be competition, complementary or
orthoganal?

If this discussion has alreay taken place, please reply with RTFM and an
appropriate pointer.



Mon, 10 Mar 1997 02:48:34 GMT  
 Q: perl vs Tcl: complementary, orthogonal or competition?

Quote:

>In selecting a scripting language to substitute for/improve on .csh et al., I
>encounter two pervasive tools: perl and tcl.

>After quickly browsing documentation for both, it seems that perl contains
>a somewhat richer function set that does tcl. It almost seems as though tcl
>provides more of a framework for constructing scripts/tools, while perl provides
>a rich set of specific low level tools (e.g. direct access to unix like file
>operations, IPC operations et al.)

>Is this a fair assesment?

>Are these tools considered by most to be competition, complementary or
>orthoganal?

>If this discussion has alreay taken place, please reply with RTFM and an
>appropriate pointer.

Perl is MUCH, MUCH, MUCH better than Tcl. It lets you program effectively
at whatever level, high or low. It beats the pants off of Tcl anyway you
compare them. Tcl is simply another silly example of someone deciding to
reinvent the wheel, and coming up with a rusty, noncircular object. There's
just nothing more to be said.

        -Kartik



Wed, 12 Mar 1997 09:33:40 GMT  
 Q: perl vs Tcl: complementary, orthogonal or competition?

Quote:


>>In selecting a scripting language to substitute for/improve on .csh et al., I
>>encounter two pervasive tools: perl and tcl.

[...]

Quote:
>>Are these tools considered by most to be competition, complementary or
>>orthoganal?

>>If this discussion has alreay taken place, please reply with RTFM and an
>>appropriate pointer.

>Perl is MUCH, MUCH, MUCH better than Tcl. It lets you program effectively
>at whatever level, high or low. It beats the pants off of Tcl anyway you
>compare them. Tcl is simply another silly example of someone deciding to
>reinvent the wheel, and coming up with a rusty, noncircular object. There's
>just nothing more to be said.

Having peeked at Tcl once and run away I would say that perl didn't
frighten me as much, but if I wanted a language to embed then Tcl might
be it.  I think it shares a problem with emacs lisp in that it is
basically a "small" language and each of the extensions and additions
tend to have their own character whereas Perl has a fairly consistent
"feel" to it.  I wouldn't be quite so damning to Tcl, but that's just my
British reserve showing through ;-)

Anyway I suspect a choice of language depends on too many things such as
the application, platform, programmer's background etc. to make a cut and
dried choice - if I didn't have to get work done during the day I'd love
to have time to become familiar with lots more languages...

Mike

--
The "usual disclaimers" apply.    | Meiko
Mike Stok                         | 130C Baker Ave. Ext

Meiko tel: (508) 371 0088 x124    |



Wed, 12 Mar 1997 11:51:54 GMT  
 Q: perl vs Tcl: complementary, orthogonal or competition?

Quote:
Subbarao) writes:
> Perl is MUCH, MUCH, MUCH better than Tcl. It lets you program effectively
> at whatever level, high or low. It beats the pants off of Tcl anyway you
> compare them.
>    -Kartik

Well, to be fair tcl is meant to be a small language, and as such one must
also the consider the libraries that have been written as
extensions to the language, as that is the main mechanism by which
small languages acquire functionality. Are you saying that perl
is MUCH**3 better than Tcl plus its standard extensions?

As for Perl:

The problems I see with perl are that:

(1) it has an unnecessarily
complicated/ugly syntax and name space conventions, that tends to lead to
 obfuscated code (though not as obscure as sed,awk,sh code) and

(2)  It also seems to be a
rather derivative language---it essentially just collects together
all the useful features found in

-unix shell languages,
-standard unix commands,
-unix C system routines,
-standard C libraries

and rolls them into one big interpreted, system independent  language.  
That may be nearly ideal if your goal is to write unix system administration  
routines  and portable unix scripts. But that is probably a poor basis
for a general purpose programming language; such a language should have
a general basis and a library devoted to the points above, not
the other way around.

--
Barry Merriman
UCLA Dept. of Math
UCLA Inst. for Fusion and Plasma Research



Fri, 14 Mar 1997 11:14:34 GMT  
 Q: perl vs Tcl: complementary, orthogonal or competition?

:The problems I see with perl are that:
:
:(1) it has an unnecessarily
:complicated/ugly syntax and name space conventions, that tends to lead to
: obfuscated code (though not as obscure as sed,awk,sh code) and

What ugly namespace conventions? $! and such?
Are you talking about perl4 or perl5?   I don't believe that tcl has
very good namespace conventions, although I could be wrong.  It
seems to me that the Perl exporter mechanism is miles beyond tcl.

:(2)  It also seems to be a
:rather derivative language---it essentially just collects together
:all the useful features found in

Why's that so bad?  To some extent, everything has done that, from C
to English and back again.

:-unix shell languages,
:-standard unix commands,
:-unix C system routines,
:-standard C libraries
:
:and rolls them into one big interpreted, system independent  language.  
:That may be nearly ideal if your goal is to write unix system administration  
:routines  and portable unix scripts. But that is probably a poor basis
:for a general purpose programming language; such a language should have
:a general basis and a library devoted to the points above, not
:the other way around.

Larry recently commented that some of the C library stuff might
someday be transparently placed in library modules.  For example, the socket
library, just to name one.  The dbm stuff has already migrated out.

Someone asked at the LISA Perl5 BOF where Perl was heading.  To me, it
seems that it must lie in library extensions, not core changes.

--tom



Fri, 14 Mar 1997 16:04:55 GMT  
 Q: perl vs Tcl: complementary, orthogonal or competition?
"The fault, dear Brutus, lies not in our stars but in ourselves."


|>
|> Why is Perl so stupid when it comes to floating point math?  
|>
|> Example:
|>
|>      $num = 43545.0;
|>
|>      $num = $num / 10.0;
|>      print "$num\n";
|>
|>      $num = $num / 10.0;
|>      print "$num\n";
|>
|>      $num = $num / 10.0;
|>      print "$num\n";
|>
|> Results:
|>
|> 4354.5
|> 435.44999999999998863
|> 43.545000000000001705
|>
|>
|>
|> This example program has worked incorrectly on every machine I have
|> tried it on, therefore I have concluded that it isn't a problem with
|> the installation on my machine.
|>
|> Any thoughts?
|>
|> Rob

Consider that the binary representation of 0.45 (the fractional part of
435.45) is

0.0111 0011 0011 0011.....

with a repeating group of 0011s. Any computer that uses binary (i.e. all
of them) will have to round this somewhere. Hence the ubiquity of the
observed phenomenon does not necessarily implicate perl.

Andrew Duncan
Philips Interactive Media



Tue, 18 Mar 1997 01:58:56 GMT  
 
 [ 7 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. Q: perl vs Tcl: complementary, orthogonal

2. Qs: Perl vs. Lisp

3. embedding tcl vs. perl

4. perl vs tcl (was Re: New version of C-like interpreter available)

5. tcl vs. perl

6. tcl vs. perl

7. perl vs tcl

8. Expect/TCL vs Perl

9. embedding tcl vs. perl

10. System Administration - Perl vs Tcl.

11. Perl and-or-vs TCL

12. TCL Speed vs PERL

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software