>  Yeah, I mean people are used to Tcl not having OO. Now we come and say "well, FINALLY we c
an do OO with Tcl"... funny from a users perspective: "ooohhhh, FINALLY you got it" ;-).

Better late than never.

IMO, the lack of coherent, organized OO is something that trips people
up with Tcl.

> > > Consider Scheme: it has NO builtin OO system, but is doing quite well
> > > in terms of popularity.
> >
> > It is? I must have blinked and missed it.
> 
>  Maybe (just kidding :-)).
>  Well, if you put it together with Lisp, the attention is not so bad... The key point is ab
out the "selling" pattern that Scheme follows (selling itself to its users), and in terms of
 minimality this is quite similar to Tcl.
>  There are other languages that follow the same pattern and are more or less popular: JavaS
cript, Haskell and Erlang come to mind.

Javascript is distributed in everyone's browsers, so of course it's
popular.  Haskell and Erlang are getting some buzz, but aren't exactly
widely used at this point.  The second has a shot at mainstream
popularity, but they will have to get a number of things right that
I'm not sure they will be able to do:

http://journal.dedasys.com/articles/2007/09/22/erlang

C is a good example of a 'minimal core' language with lots of add ons,
but that language is what, 40 years old?  People expect to get more
stuff out of the box in 2008.

-- 
David N. Welton

http://www.welton.it/davidw/

http://www.dedasys.com/

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
Tcl-Core mailing list
Tcl-Core@[...].net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tcl-core