Running old code and TCL in particular

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Running old code and TCL in particular

Joe Armstrong-2
I've been having fun digging up some old programs to see if they still
work.

It's a good test of stability - can I run 20 year old code - or does
it need a lot of fixing.

Most (not all) of my pre 2000 Erlang still works - one advantage of
using no NIFS
and trying to write clean code.

Most of my old TCL works (with the latest TCL)

Most of my old makefiles and bash scripts still work.

Most of my old C does not work (but then I always wrote crap C)

Back to TCL -

It's still great - when did we chuck gs? - I think this was a big mistake.

The only thing wrong with TCL is the smallish user base and the somewhat cryptic
documentation.

Are there any other TCL fans out there?

Specifically is anybody using TCL (latest) through sockets and "sans
NIFS" as it were.

Has anybody done the round trip Erlang -> TCL -> Erlang with binaries
without loss of
data - TCL's "everything is a string" philosophy does not mesh well
with Erlang binaries :-)

Cheers

/Joe
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Running old code and TCL in particular

Fred Youhanaie-2
Hi Joe,

I have a couple of Erlang/Tcl projects, both need some time and attention from me!

- Tcl code as c-node: https://github.com/fredyouhanaie/etclface
- Tcl code as a port: https://github.com/fredyouhanaie/portcl

Although Tcl treats "everything as string", If you have a number, and use it in a numeric expression, then the numeric version will be stored internally.

I haven't tried the round trip test, but I'll add it to my todo list.

Cheers,
Fred


On 04/04/2019 15:30, Joe Armstrong wrote:

> I've been having fun digging up some old programs to see if they still
> work.
>
> It's a good test of stability - can I run 20 year old code - or does
> it need a lot of fixing.
>
> Most (not all) of my pre 2000 Erlang still works - one advantage of
> using no NIFS
> and trying to write clean code.
>
> Most of my old TCL works (with the latest TCL)
>
> Most of my old makefiles and bash scripts still work.
>
> Most of my old C does not work (but then I always wrote crap C)
>
> Back to TCL -
>
> It's still great - when did we chuck gs? - I think this was a big mistake.
>
> The only thing wrong with TCL is the smallish user base and the somewhat cryptic
> documentation.
>
> Are there any other TCL fans out there?
>
> Specifically is anybody using TCL (latest) through sockets and "sans
> NIFS" as it were.
>
> Has anybody done the round trip Erlang -> TCL -> Erlang with binaries
> without loss of
> data - TCL's "everything is a string" philosophy does not mesh well
> with Erlang binaries :-)
>
> Cheers
>
> /Joe
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Running old code and TCL in particular

Bob Gustafson-2
In reply to this post by Joe Armstrong-2
I remember my Expect scripts using TCL/Expect. A lot easier to change
than buggy 2019 Fabric scripts...

On 4/4/19 9:30 AM, Joe Armstrong wrote:

> I've been having fun digging up some old programs to see if they still
> work.
>
> It's a good test of stability - can I run 20 year old code - or does
> it need a lot of fixing.
>
> Most (not all) of my pre 2000 Erlang still works - one advantage of
> using no NIFS
> and trying to write clean code.
>
> Most of my old TCL works (with the latest TCL)
>
> Most of my old makefiles and bash scripts still work.
>
> Most of my old C does not work (but then I always wrote crap C)
>
> Back to TCL -
>
> It's still great - when did we chuck gs? - I think this was a big mistake.
>
> The only thing wrong with TCL is the smallish user base and the somewhat cryptic
> documentation.
>
> Are there any other TCL fans out there?
>
> Specifically is anybody using TCL (latest) through sockets and "sans
> NIFS" as it were.
>
> Has anybody done the round trip Erlang -> TCL -> Erlang with binaries
> without loss of
> data - TCL's "everything is a string" philosophy does not mesh well
> with Erlang binaries :-)
>
> Cheers
>
> /Joe
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions