''Tcl's syntax is small enough to fit in the working memory of a typical human.'' -- [Cameron Laird] ** Summary ** The [Dodekalogue%|%syntax of Tcl scripts] is minimal and elegant. Additional layers of complexity and power are achieved via commands. Some commands pass one or more of their arguments to the interpreter for [Many ways to eval%|%evaluation as a separate script]. Other commands such as `[subst]` perform a subset of the steps performed to fully evaluate a script. Commands such as `[exec]`, `[expr]`, `[glob]`, and `[regexp]` implement their own [little language%|%little languages] that are independent of the main interpreter. `[expr]` is particularly interesting because it is almost a superset of Tcl itself. One of the distinguishing features of Tcl among string-based languages is that although it features substitutions, the substituted values are not themselves scanned for additional subsitutions. This gives Tcl a distincly different flavour than [Unix shells] or [TeX]. [List%|%Lists] are a subject in their own right. Their syntax is that of Tcl, but without the dynamic features of substitution and command evaluation. ** See Also ** [#]: [{*}]: specifies that each item in a [list] should be considered an individual argument to the current command [http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.tcl/msg/61d39c42794c4955%|%"args" == ARGH! Are they _really_ good for anything?], [Brent Welch], [comp.lang.tcl], 1994-02-01: [BNF for Tcl]: [A parser's monolog]: [An indentation syntax for Tcl]: [Brace your expr-essions]: [comment]: The various ways of commenting a script. [Dodekalogue%|%Rules of Tcl]: The "official" rules. [Glossary for Tcl syntax]: [Hunt for Tcl Extensional Equivalents]: [Is there a a decent tcl script for finding matching brackets]?: [Syntax parsing in Tcl]: [substitution]: [syntax]: [Static syntax analysis]: [Tcl Quoting]: [Why is Tcl syntax so weird]: In a nutshell: Because it's new to you :) <> Syntax