----
[CL] writes on news:comp.lang.tcl:

"... The Expect (as a language) we commonly learn is an abbreviation of the platonic Expect in which we can most portably write.  The true action pair is

  exp_send $challenge
  expect $response

rather than

  send $challenge
  expect $response

As a convenience, base Expect includes several synonyms,
of which {exp_send,send} is one example.

When working with an extended Tcl, such as Tk, it's often
necessary to project back to the canonical command forms,
specifically to resolve name conflicts (Tk has its own [send]).

If Expect had been written for ten-year-old Tcl, rather
than being the first extension ever discovered, it of
course would rely on namespaces to avoid name conflicts.

[D. J. Hagberg] rightly writes, "Here's the BIG RULE for Expect:
Every exp_spawn requires a call to exp_close *and* exp_wait."

Some of the people who have stumbled on Expect in the year 2001
would actually be better served by [ssh] or such protocol packages
from [tcllib] as [ftp], [http], [smtp],

 ...  [CL] especially emphasizes that
there are many jobs--FTP [http://phaseit.net/claird/comp.unix.programmer/ftp_automation.html]
and e-mail automation, especially--for which Expect is generally '''not''' the best tool.  For those who insist, though, [w3m] provides a nice model of what's possible with standard command-line utilities for these protocols.
[Stubsification of Expect]

[CL] recently mentioned on comp.lang.tcl that expect has a $HOME/.expectrc file that can be used to predefine procs, variables, etc. that one uses regularly.

[[CL needs to explain inband_ftp, Expect philosophy, and vivid '''cat'''-based example.  Also, how to handle sensitive information (passwords) embedded in plain-text Expect scripts.]]

Expect's old.  Expect disappoints and frustrates some newcomers,
because it's done well in the style of 1992-1994.  With PHP, for
example, if you have a question or a need for explanation, you're
likely to find http://www.php.net/ rewarding.  That's not how Expect
is managed, at least not now (mid-2002).  Expect's high-level aim
is that, "It's in the book" ([BOOK Exploring Expect])
accurately answers all questions.  The
book is really quite marvelous as both introduction and reference--but
its style might strike some readers as archaic and inaccessible, at
least until they shift to accept the approach that was the best in
computing about a decade ago.

This is [CL]'s personal view.
----
[Category Expect]