Re: [stack] New language V (on JVM)

Jr" <wtanksleyjr@...> wrote:

> Curiosity: what's your goals?

dont have any goals (other than minimal syntax - (just '[' and ']'))
for now, I think I will let the language evolve and see where it goes.

> Your definition syntax looks nice, by the way. Simple and clean...

thanks,

> Although I suppose one could complain that it's hard to visually
> discern definitions from random blocks of code, I think it'll be
> pretty rare to just have a random block of code.

I agree it is hard to see definitions if it is inside an unformated
block of code but usually users format and delimit definitions 
with empty lines comment headers and such,
I hope it would not prove to be a bad decision.

> Can definitions be constructed at runtime? Is "." a normal word or 
is it syntax?

. is just a normal word.
|[hi] ['hello' puts] concat .
|hi
=hello

> I've occasionally wondered what a concatenative language modeled to
> take advantage of the JVM would look like. I recall that the JVM 
isn't
> totally stack-centered; it has a lot of machinery for stack frames 
as
> well.