This is especially true for those of us who do application support.
When we are investigating application stack traces from production for a large application, it is awful when you discover that the developers decided to be clever with dynamic function names, making a large code base very difficult to support based on available logs.
If you think you're being clever you're probably just being a dick.
I work for a medium-large technology company supplying mission critical software (very large amounts of money are involved). We use Tcl for the vast majority of our software. We may head towards Java in the future, but not so much due to any failings of Tcl, more because it is easier to recruit Java programmers.
I think the general consensus at our company is that Tcl was the right choice, although our programmers do occasionally gripe at some Tcl shortcomings.
When we are investigating application stack traces from production for a large application, it is awful when you discover that the developers decided to be clever with dynamic function names, making a large code base very difficult to support based on available logs.
If you think you're being clever you're probably just being a dick.