From owner-freebsd-hackers Sun May 11 12:43:11 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id MAA10403 for hackers-outgoing; Sun, 11 May 1997 12:43:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.50]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id MAA10398 for ; Sun, 11 May 1997 12:43:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id MAA06132; Sun, 11 May 1997 12:37:44 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199705111937.MAA06132@phaeton.artisoft.com> Subject: Re: project: editor To: hasty@rah.star-gate.com (Amancio Hasty) Date: Sun, 11 May 1997 12:37:44 -0700 (MST) Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <199705111229.FAA01208@rah.star-gate.com> from "Amancio Hasty" at May 11, 97 05:29:31 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > You are correct I do need a scripting language .The question is which one? > > Not sure that I like tcl for this sort of thing .. however I am considering > it . The problem that I have with tcl for end users is that it is not > an intuitive language nor is it well structured unless one uses something > like tcl / incr. I have to think about it a little longer and explore > other alternatives . I think that wksh has a number of significant advantes for this type of work: o It's the SVR4 answer to the same problem o Script portability across UNIX clone OS's o Legacy Bourne shell scripts will run with few changes o It's required for Open UNIX Standard compliance The only real drawback is that there isn't a pd implementation (I admit that this is a whopper of a drawback, but a grammar-based set of changes in light of the wksh book shouldn't be too hard). Regards, Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.