Re: [stack] Concatenative macros?

[email protected] <[email protected]> wrote:
> i think i like this.

I just noticed a problem with my idea. Help me...

> Billy wrote on 01/11/2007 01:02:12 PM:
> > I propose:

> > i1   [A]-A

[...snip...]

>    i2   a-A
> In my notation, this is the general form of 'i'; it executes anything,
> list or non-list.

I'm wrong about i2. It won't correctly execute a list, because if i1
works, the result of executing a list MUST be the list itself. (Try
passing a list containing a list, such as [[2]], to 'i'.)

So my notation can't express Joy's 'i', because my notation can only
execute lists, not atoms.

Unless, of course, we choose to allow me to define Joy's 'i' as:

 i == [ atom? ] [ a-A ] [ [A]-A ] ifte.

That may be acceptable, since Joy's i wasn't originally intended to
work that way (it just happened, from what I recall).

What do you think?

-Billy