CRIBBSJ wrote:

(I replied to this, but didn't notice that it went to OP only.
So, this is my attempt to recreate my comments.)

> Tcl/Tk

> * Syntax is quirky.

To me, the syntax is regular and constant:

	command  arguments

Group things with { }
Evaluate things with [ ]
No need for dots, parens, commas, semicolons, quotes, double-quotes, 
indenting white space, etc. to mess it up.  (Although some of those
can be used.)

> * Can't pass arrays (hash in Ruby) to functions.

But, we can pass the name of the array, and use 'upval' to access it.

> * When building Guis, sometimes I feel the code gets kind of cluttered with
> tons of widget commands followed by tons of pack commands.

I think this would happen with any toolkit.
I tend to write helper procs to generate things for me
(a labeled slider with annotated value and entry box),
and then use those procs.  Bunch of samples on my web page.

> Ruby
> -----
> Pros:
> 
> * Very clean syntax that seems to be pretty intuitive.

Yes!  (but we can drop the "seems to be" phrase)

> * Built in support for lots of libraries (smtp, ole, os level, etc.).  To
> me, it strikes a good balance between the "kitchen sinkness" of Python and
> the "minimalist model" of Lua.

Yes!!

> * OO layer makes more sense to me than in any other language I have looked
> at (remember I don't know much about OO).

YES!!!!  This is where Ruby really shines!

--
Mike Hall
http://www.enteract.com/~mghall