Re: Tcl misconceptions

[ttn@mingle.glug.org]

Maciej Stachowiak writes:

 > b.stephens@isode.com writes:
 > > Tcl 8 and later (i.e., Tcl with its byte compiler) is quite different,
 > > underneath, to previous Tcl's.  I suspect glossing over this is a
 > > mistake, if you want to try translating it.
 > > 
 > > Tcl 8 is *not* just strings, internally.  
 > > 
 > > My understand of things is that strings have a special place, in that
 > > they provide a format that ought always to exist, but the string form
 > > need not be meaningful.
 > > 
 > 
 > My understanding is that Tcl 8 uses non-string representations
 > internally sometimes, but is still meant to have the exact same
 > semantics as the old all-strings version. Thus, while looking at 8.0
 > internals might provide helpful hints on how to be clever about
 > interpreting Tcl, it won't provide particularly deeper insight into
 > the semantics.

Hmm, getting Tcl objects internally (ie, `read') is already done.  Why
not snarf all that stuff and just play with the internals?  I would
think the internals would provide exact insight into semantics.  Parsing
and parsers get old, IMHO.

thi