Where is TASH, the Tcl/Tk binding?

Where is TASH, the Tcl/Tk binding?

[Jerry]

Where is TASH, the Tcl/Tk binding? Actually, I have the binding and
they are working for me (Mac OS X) but all of the links that I've
found to TASH have gone stale. I'm just wondering (a) if there is
documentation that I could benefit from and (2) has this project gone
quiet and I shouldn't use it?

Thanks,
Jerry

Re: Where is TASH, the Tcl/Tk binding?

[Simon Wright]

Jerry <lanceboyle@qwest.net> writes:

> Where is TASH, the Tcl/Tk binding? Actually, I have the binding and
> they are working for me (Mac OS X) but all of the links that I've
> found to TASH have gone stale. I'm just wondering (a) if there is
> documentation that I could benefit from and (2) has this project
> gone quiet and I shouldn't use it?

It's at http://tcladashell.sourceforge.net/

It would be really neat if someone else was to show an interest in
joining the project! As things stand I've not got a lot of time to
spare; also, my preferred way of using Tcl and Ada is by extending the
interpreter, I see no point in providing bindings so that Tcl
facilities can be used by Ada programs -- write those bits in Tcl! --
so I'm not going to see where the holes/bugs in the current
implementation are.

I guess I should make a release; for the moment you'll have to use
CVS, http://sourceforge.net/cvs/?group_id=164395 . Bug reports
welcome ..

Re: Where is TASH, the Tcl/Tk binding?

[ezkcdude]

On Apr 19, 4:29 pm, Simon Wright <simon.j.wri...@mac.com> wrote:
> Jerry <lancebo...@qwest.net> writes:
> > Where is TASH, theTcl/Tkbinding? Actually, I have the binding and
> > they are working for me (Mac OS X) but all of the links that I've
> > found to TASH have gone stale. I'm just wondering (a) if there is
> > documentation that I could benefit from and (2) has this project
> > gone quiet and I shouldn't use it?
>
> It's athttp://tcladashell.sourceforge.net/
>
> It would be really neat if someone else was to show an interest in
> joining the project! As things stand I've not got a lot of time to
> spare; also, my preferred way of using Tcl and Ada is by extending the
> interpreter, I see no point in providing bindings so that Tcl
> facilities can be used by Ada programs -- write those bits in Tcl! --
> so I'm not going to see where the holes/bugs in the current
> implementation are.
>
> I guess I should make a release; for the moment you'll have to use
> CVS,http://sourceforge.net/cvs/?group_id=164395. Bug reports
> welcome ..

I understand not wanting to use Tcl+Ada, but how about calling Tk from
Ada? How does one go about doing that?

Re: Where is TASH, the Tcl/Tk binding?

[Maciej Sobczak]

On 24 Maj, 14:56, ezkcdude <zamir.e...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I understand not wanting to use Tcl+Ada, but how about calling Tk from
> Ada? How does one go about doing that?

There is basically no way to call Tk directly. It was designed to be
called from Tcl interpreter.

Normally, the Tk library for whatever language has an *embedded* Tcl
interpreter that makes actual Tk calls. It is encapsulated, so you
might as well pretend you don't know about that interpreter somewhere
there. :-)

Interestingly, the Tkinter binding for Python also works this way (it
has "inter" in the name for a reason!), which brings a question why
the hell should we use two interpreters one on top of another...

Just for fun: http://cpptk.sourceforge.net/

--
Maciej Sobczak
http://www.msobczak.com/

Re: Where is TASH, the Tcl/Tk binding?

[ezkcdude]

On May 24, 8:07 am, Maciej Sobczak <see.my.homep...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 24 Maj, 14:56, ezkcdude <zamir.e...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I understand not wanting to use Tcl+Ada, but how about calling Tk from
> > Ada? How does one go about doing that?
>
> There is basically no way to call Tk directly. It was designed to be
> called from Tcl interpreter.
>
> Normally, the Tk library for whatever language has an *embedded* Tcl
> interpreter that makes actual Tk calls. It is encapsulated, so you
> might as well pretend you don't know about that interpreter somewhere
> there. :-)
>
> Interestingly, the Tkinter binding for Python also works this way (it
> has "inter" in the name for a reason!), which brings a question why
> the hell should we use two interpreters one on top of another...
>
> Just for fun:http://cpptk.sourceforge.net/
>
> --
> Maciej Sobczakhttp://www.msobczak.com/

Thanks, when you put it that way, it doesn't make sense to me either.