>>Unfortunately, Tcl/Tk won't read ERRORLEVEL, since it's cross-platform to Windows, Unix (and Linux of course), and Macintosh.
>
>Then it's flawed; if it checks and returns the termination code, it gets the DOS errorlevel, which is the same thing.

I'm not sure that it's fair to call the Unix paradigm flawed, just as much as I wouldn't be fair to call the DOS-based paradigm flawed. They just use different approaches. I would claim that the DOS approach is less flexible for me, given my approach to problem-solving.

Interestingly enough, the exec command isn't implemented in the Macintosh version of the language at all.

>Read the MSDN docs, and go bitch at whatever gave you the flakey, useless tool.

I don't know - so far, the lack of a Unix-style return code is the only problem I've had with Tcl/Tk yet, so I can't call it useless. And Dr. Ousterhout (Tcl/Tk's creator) is far more knowledgeable in computer science than I, so I would not have the mental ammunition to complain to him.

Besides, I'm looking at salary scales, and it may well be worth my effort to move back over to the Unix/Linux arena. Hence the interest in Tcl/Tk, Perl, and so on.