Re: RFC: Additional testsuite alternative

[Jim Blandy <jimb at redhat dot com>]

It's a pity to implement a little language in Tcl.  People always
introduce little languages, saying, "I just need a very simple
language for this one situation; I don't need anything complex."
And then, minor feature by minor feature, it grows, until you've got
the Bourne shell.

Doesn't the Tcl we're using nowadays have namespaces?  Can't we make
.x files just Tcl scripts that run in a namespace that has all the
right commands in it?  Then Daniel's example:

    #compile two.cc two.exe executable debug
    #runto main
    #test "ptype StrOne"
    type = class OneStruct {
      public:
        int simple;
    [synthetic OneStruct]}
    #test "ptype ConstStrOnePtr"
    type = const class OneStruct {
      public:
        int simple;
    [synthetic OneStruct]} \*

could just be:

    compile two.cc two.exe executable debug
    runto main
    test "ptype StrOne" {
    type = class OneStruct {
      public:
        int simple;
    [synthetic OneStruct]}
    }
    test "ptype ConstStrOnePtr" {
    type = const class OneStruct {
      public:
        int simple;
    [synthetic OneStruct]} \*
    }

And you've got all your quoting stuff, comments, substitution, etc for
free.  Designed carefully, not grown incrementally.