Does Tcl matter to system administrators? Absolutely; in fact, CL argues [L1 ] that Tcl is the single most useful language for them to learn.
[... details ...]
[... Windows, too. and MacOS. And OpenVMS and OS/400! ...]
[ Don Libes' papers on sysad: http://expect.nist.gov/doc/autoexpect.pdf ; http://expect.nist.gov/doc/bgpasswd.ps ; http://expect.nist.gov/doc/sysadm.ps ; ... others ...]
Cameron Laird had this to say in comp.lang.tcl:
When people set up these bake-offs, I usually turn away; it's just too easy for Perl to dominate in the obvious "check-box" items.
I have particularly strong feelings about this role, though. In all the "Is {Java,Erlang,PHP,...} better than {C++,Rexx,,Ada,...} for {Web scripting,COM auto- mation,...}?" competitions, one of the easiest correct conclusions to draw is that Tcl is the single most essential and desirable language for cross-plat- form system administration. Here's why:
Some Perlites will argue this point. I've been studying it for a long time. I'm right.
*Tcl Blend works. The Java/Perl combinations mostly don't. *Tcl has the strongest tradition of use as a testing language. Is the pertinence of that to SysAd clear? *Naive users take to Tcl at least as quickly as to Perl.
I don't put too much weight on this proposition. Season to taste, or, more specifically, apply as appropriate in your own situation.
In what language did Oracle develop its Oracle Enterprise Manager sysad tool? Tcl. In what language did IBM develop its WebSphere Control Program? OK, Patrick, I know you already know this answer. Neither of these companies particularly *likes* Tcl; I've talked with PR types with both, and they're trained to hide Tcl's role. Tcl's technical virtues in these applications are unmistakeable, though.