Ty> It depends on the application. If what you're trying to embed
Ty> in works in terms of text, Tcl is dead simple to embed. No
Ty> reference counts, no objects, no worrying about type
Ty> mismatches, etc. Tcl only does strings.
Ty> Now, if you're interfacing with complex objects, python may
Ty> embed more easily.
I'm working on a project at the moment which requires an embedded,
interpretive language. At first, it appeared that tcl was "easier"
to embed and so that was the first language we tried. After many
complaints about the language syntax (I'm afraid we didn't view it
as "clean" either) I then tried python. There was a bit more up
front work but it wasn't because python was "harder" to embed, it
was because python is a much richer language and you have to be
more considerate about making sure that any extensions you provide
are done in a way which is consistent with the existing language.
In comparison, tcl has such a paucity of language features that
you have to resort to inventing your own syntax. That probably
sounds rather imflammatory, but it really isn't intended to be.
Tcl is fine as a shell-like language, but python provides so
much more as a language (real types for a start) that its difficult
to compare them.
Just my 0.02 worth.
Mitch
----------------------------------------------------------------
Mitch Garnaat Xerox Corp.
garnaat@wrc.xerox.com (716)422-5627