Why curly braces allow variable substitution? - tcl

Tcl manuals say that curly braces do not allow variable substitution.
However this works only with some commands but not with others.
What is the difference and how to identify the cases where the substitution will occur and the cases where it won't occur?
% set x 3
3
% puts {$x}
$x
% expr {$x}
3

Referring to the list of standard commands: any command that takes a "body" or "script" argument will eventually evaluate that body as code. With no guarantees about exhaustiveness:
after, apply, catch, eval, expr, fileevent (and chan event), for, foreach, if, interp eval, lmap, some namespace subcommands, some oo::* commands, proc, subst, switch, try, uplevel, while
This is truly one of Tcl's greatest strengths. It gives you the power to easily write your own control structures. For example, Tcl does not provide a do-while loop, but you can do this:
proc do {body while condition} {
if {$while ni {while until}} {
error "some message about usage..."
}
while true {
uplevel 1 $body
set status [uplevel 1 [list expr $condition]]
if {$while eq "while" && !$status} then break
if {$while eq "until" && $status} then break
}
}
so that
% set i 0; while {[incr i] < 3} {puts "$i"}
1
2
% set i 0; do {puts "$i"} while {[incr i] < 3}
0
1
2
% set i 0; do {puts "$i"} until {[incr i] == 3}
0
1
2

Some commands are explicitly described as treating an argument or arguments as a script or an expression; when evaluation of the script or expression happens (which might be immediately, or might be later, depending on the command) the substitutions described inside that string that is a script or expression are performed. (The subst command is a special case that can only apply a selected subset of substitutions.)
How do you know which is which? It depends on the command. Literally. Go and read the documentation. For example, in the documentation for catch we see:
SYNOPSIS
catch script ?resultVarName? ?optionsVarName?
DESCRIPTION
The catch command may be used to prevent errors from aborting command interpretation. The catch command calls the Tcl interpreter recursively to execute script, and always returns without raising an error, regardless of any errors that might occur while executing script. […]
In this case, we see that the first argument is always evaluated (immediately) as a Tcl script by calling the Tcl interpreter (or rather it's actually bytecode compiled in most cases, but that's an implementation detail).
Similarly, in the documentation for proc we see:
SYNOPSIS
proc name args body
DESCRIPTION
The proc command creates a new Tcl procedure named name, replacing any existing command or procedure there may have been by that name. Whenever the new command is invoked, the contents of body will be executed by the Tcl interpreter. […]
In this case, it's the body that is going to be evaluated as a script (“by the Tcl interpreter” is a form of language that means that) but later, when the procedure is called. (catch said nothing about that; by implication, it acts immediately.)
A third case is the documentation for while:
SYNOPSIS
while test body
DESCRIPTION
The while command evaluates test as an expression (in the same way that expr evaluates its argument). The value of the expression must a proper boolean value; if it is a true value then body is executed by passing it to the Tcl interpreter. […]
From this, we can see that the test argument is an expression (which uses expression rules) and body is a script.
If you want to create a substitution-free single-command script where you can use arbitrary values for everything (this perfect for setting up a callback) use the list command as that is defined to produce lists in canonical form, which happens (by design) to be exactly the form that single commands without substitution-surprises can take:
set xyz "123 456"
set callback [list puts $xyz]
set xyz {[crash bang wallop]}
puts "READY..."
eval $callback

Related

Evaluate variables at delayed command with after

I have process were variables are defined, and following that procedure the variables should be used after a delay.
The problem is that the delayed command process the variables when the command is executed instead of when the command is given. Consider the following example:
The code is not tested, but the point should be clear anyway:
for {set i 0} {$i < 100} {incr i} {
set outputItem $i
set time [expr 1000+100*$i]
after $time {puts "Output was $outputItem"}
}
Which I would hope print something like:
Output was 1
Output was 2
Output was 3
...
But actually it prints:
Output was 100
Output was 100
Output was 100
Which I guess shows that tcl keeps the parameter name (and not the value of the variable) when the after command is initiated.
Is there any way to substitute the variable name to the variable content, so that the delayed command (after xxx yyy) works as desired?
The problem is this line:
after $time {puts "Output was $outputItem"}
The substitution of $outputItem is happening when the after event fires, not at the time you defined it. (The braces prevent anything else.) To get what you want, you need list quoting, and that's done with the list command:
after $time [list puts "Output was $outputItem"]
The list command builds lists… and pre-substituted commands (because of the way Tcl's syntax is defined). It's great for building things that you're going to call later. I guess it could have been called make-me-a-callback too, but then people would have wondered about its use for creating lists. It does both.
If your callback needs to be two or more commands, use a helper procedure (or an apply) to wrap it up into a single command; the reduction in confusion at trying to make callbacks work with multiple direct commands is totally worth it.

tcl scripts, struggling with [...] and [expr ...]

I can't understand how assignments and use of variables work in Tcl.
Namely:
If I do something like
set a 5
set b 10
and I do
set c [$a + $b]
Following what internet says:
You obtain the results of a command by placing the command in square
brackets ([]). This is the functional equivalent of the back single
quote (`) in sh programming, or using the return value of a function
in C.
So my statement should set c to 15, right?
If yes, what's the difference with
set c [expr $a + $b]
?
If no, what does that statement do?
Tcl's a really strict language at its core; it always follows the rules. For your case, we can therefore analyse it like this:
set c [$a + $b]
That's three words, set (i.e., the standard “write to a variable” command), c, and what we get from evaluating the contents of the brackets in [$a + $b]. That in turn is a script formed by a single command invocation with another three words, the contents of the a variable (5), +, and the contents of the b variable (10). That the values look like numbers is irrelevant: the rules are the same in all cases.
Since you probably haven't got a command called 5, that will give you an error. On the other hand, if you did this beforehand:
proc 5 {x y} {
return "flarblegarble fleek"
}
then your script would “work”, writing some (clearly defined) utter nonsense words into the c variable. If you want to evaluate a somewhat mathematical expression, you use the expr command; that's it's one job in life, to concatenate all its arguments (with a space between them) and evaluate the result as an expression using the documented little expression language that it understands.
You virtually always want to put braces around the expression, FWIW.
There are other ways to make what you wrote do what you expect, but don't do them. They're slow. OTOH, if you are willing to put the + first, you can make stuff go fast with minimum interference:
# Get extra commands available for Lisp-like math...
namespace path ::tcl::mathop
set c [+ $a $b]
If you're not a fan of Lisp-style prefix math, use expr. It's what most Tcl programmers do, after all.
set c [$a + $b]
Running the above command, you will get invalid command name "5" error message.
For mathematical operations, we should rely on expr only as Tcl treats everything as string.
set c [expr $a + $b]
In this case, the value of a and b is passed and addition is performed.
Here, it is always safe and recommended to brace the expressions as,
set c [expr {$a+$b}]
To avoid any possible surprises in the evaluation.
Update 1 :
In Tcl, everything is based on commands. It can a user-defined proc or existing built-in commands such as lindex. Using a bare-word of string will trigger a command call. Similarly, usage of [ and ] will also trigger the same.
In your case, $a replaced with the value of the variable a and since they are enclosed within square brackets, it triggers command call and since there is no command with the name 5, you are getting the error.

How to pass a variable value as an argument to -command option in tcl [duplicate]

button .mltext.button -text "Apply" -command {set top_tlbl [update_text $top_tlbl $spc ] }
I get an error :
can't read "spc": no such variable
while executing
"update_text $top_tlbl $spc "
invoked from within
".mltext.button invoke"
How can I pass the values of the variables to the update_text function?
Maybe I can start by understanding this :
(System32) 3 % expr 2 + 2
4
(System32) 4 % list expr 2 + 2
expr 2 + 2
(System32) 5 % [list expr 2 + 2]
invalid command name "expr 2 + 2"
(System32) 6 %
According to me, the last one should generate expr 2 + 2, which is the same as the first command - so, why does TCL have a problem?
Thanks..
In your examples with expr, we start by counting the words.
expr 2 + 2 has four words: expr, 2, + and 2. The first one is the command name, expr, and the others are passed as arguments; the documentation for expr says that it concatenates its arguments and evaluates the resulting expression.
list expr 2 + 2 has five words: list, expr, 2, + and 2. The first one is the command name, list, and the others are passed as arguments; the documentation for list say that it returns the list that has its arguments as elements. Though we don't see it here explicitly, what this does is introduce exactly the quoting needed to make a single substitution-free command. Good Tcl code uses list quite a lot when generating code.
[list expr 2 + 2] has one word, which is the result of calling list expr 2 + 2. If you just feed that into Tcl directly, it has a weird but legal command name, and you probably don't have a command called that. Hence you get an error.
Now let's consider:
button .mltext.button -text "Apply" -command {set top_tlbl [update_text $top_tlbl $spc]}
From your comments, you're calling this inside a procedure. This means that you need to bind the variables inside the callback (which is evaluated inside uplevel #0, and probably long after your current procedure has returned) without doing the callback immediately. Curiously, it looks like you're changing top_tlbl at runtime too.
Let's start by thinking about the innermost part. We can generate it with list just fine (ignoring the different lifetime bindings):
list update_text $top_tlbl $spc
Now we've just got to make the other parts work as well. That's where it gets fiddly and you end up with something like this:
… -command "set top_tlbl \[[list update_text $top_tlbl $spc]\]"
Now let's fix the lifetime stuff:
… -command "set top_tlbl \[update_text \$top_tlbl [list $spc]\]"
This sort of thing is more than a bit error-prone in complicated callbacks! At that point, it's much easier (and good practice) to have a little helper procedure:
proc do_update_text {varname value} {
upvar #0 $varname var
set var [update_text $var $value]
}
Then you can do (note: passing the name of top_tlbl, not the value):
… -command [list do_update_text top_tlbl $spc]
The use of global variable names might be considered to be problematic, except you've got to remember that the global namespace is mainly owned by your application. If you want to store variables in globals for your app, do it! You have the complete right.
Library code needs to be a bit more careful of course. The usual techniques there include using variables in other namespaces (Tk does this internally) or in objects. The code doesn't really get that much more complicated; it's still building on the practice of using helper procedures listed above. Passing a namespaced variable name is pretty easy though:
… -command [list do_update_text ::mynamespace::top_tlbl $spc]
-command {set top_tlbl [update_text $top_tlbl $spc]} will be invoked in global context when the button is clicked. Is your variable spc accessible in global context? Try to specify the variable's namespace explicitly, for example $::spc.
expr 2 + 2 and "expr 2 + 2" are not the same. Tcl identifiers can contain spaces and "expr 2 + 2" is the whole identifier, which is not found.
You should probably just call update_text and have top_tlbl be a global and set from the called function rather than returned.
Its generally simplest to just try and call a simple function and use list to ensure everything is quoted correctly.
button .mltext.button -text "Apply" \
-command [list update_text $top_tlbl $spc]
This will capture the current values of top_tlbl and spc when you define this button and its command. If you want the values at the time you press the button then you should probably be passing the names of the variables and using the variable or global commands.
Anyway, the rules are that things inside curly braces {} have no substututions performed on them. So {$v} is passed to the callee as exactly that - dollar v. Using list or double quotes lets variable substitution be performed and so you pass the value of the variable. List properly handles quoting for cases where the variable value might contain spaces and so on.

Tcl: Is parameter evaluation guaranteed to be left-to-right?

I have a Tcl program where I often find expressions of the following kind:
proc func {} {...}
...
lappend arr([set v [func]]) $v
The intended meaning of the last line is
set v [func]
lappend arr($v) $v
It obviously works. What I would like to know: Does it work "by accident", or does Tcl guarantee, that the first parameter passed to lappend is evaluated before the second?
Tcl is always evaluated from left to right as you can read on the documentation, I quote the part:
Substitutions take place from left to right, and each substitution is evaluated completely before attempting to evaluate the next. Thus, a sequence like:
set y [set x 0][incr x][incr x]
will always set the variable y to the value, 012.
Agreed with Jerry. Adding some flavor in it.
Tcl commands are evaluated in two steps : parsing & execution.
First the Tcl interpreter parses the command string into words, performing substitutions along the way.
Then a command procedure processes the words to produce a result string. Each command has a separate command procedure.
Let us consider the following code.
%set input "The cat in the hat"
The cat in the hat
%string match "*at in*" $input
1
In the parsing step the Tcl interpreter applies the rules described in this chapter to divide the command up into words and perform substitutions.
Parsing is done in exactly the same way for every command. During the parsing step the Tcl interpreter does not apply any meaning to the values of the words. Tcl just performs a set of simple string operations such as replacing the characters $a with the string stored in variable a. Tcl does not know or care whether a or the resulting word is a number or the name of a widget or anything else.
In the execution step meaning is applied to the words of the command. Tcl treats the first word as a command name, checking to see if the command is defined and locating a command procedure to carry out its function. If the command is defined then the Tcl interpreter invokes its command procedure, passing all of the words of the command to the command procedure. The command procedure is free to interpret the words in any way that it pleases, and different commands apply very different meanings to their arguments.
Major rule to remember here
Tcl parses a command and makes substitutions in a single pass from left to right. Each character is scanned exactly once.
At most a single layer of substitution occurs for each character; the result of one substitution is not scanned for further
substitutions.
Reference : Tcl and the Tk Toolkit

give arguments to a script with eval

I don't really understand how to use the eval arguments.
If the script I want to eval is :
set myscript { puts $::argv }
Then I want to call my script like this :
eval $myscript anArgument
And I expect the output to be "anArgument", but instead I have :
can not find channel named ""
while evaluating {eval $script vvv}
When you invoke eval, the command concatenates all its arguments and attempts to evaluate the resulting list (or string if you will, it's the same thing here). So, first the arguments { puts $::argv } and anArgument are concatenated into the list {puts $::argv anArgument}, and then the interpreter tries to evaluate that. If the value of the global variable argv is an empty list, the actual command invoked will be equivalent to puts {} anArgument. puts will try to use {} as a channel identifier to output to, fail and leave an error message.
Now, if what you wanted to do was to pass anArgument to myscript and then eval it as puts anArgument, you should instead write
set myscript {puts $myarg}
set myarg anArgument
eval $myscript
In the first line, the evaluation of $myarg is postponed because of the quoting braces which turn $ into a regular text character. The variable myarg is then set to a value (this can happen anywhere in the code as long as it comes before the eval). In the third line, the script is evaluated, and at that point the argument $myarg is replaced by the value anArgument, which is then printed.
The sort of invocation you attempted is possible, but then you need to use apply instead of eval, and a closure (anonymous function) instead of a script.
set myfunc {myarg {puts $myarg}}
apply $myfunc anArgument
The global variable argv does not pass arguments to a script which is passed to eval: when tclsh or wish is started by the operating system, any command line arguments given are placed in argv, and the value is never changed during execution unless you change it yourself (don't do that, it's just confusing).
Documentation: apply, eval, puts, set
argv is documented here.