Re: [stack] Why is point-free form so interesting?
John Carter <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lang.concatenative |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
There is a lot else in your response worth reading and perhaps commenting on... But I couldn't resist a quickie... On Mon, 16 Jul 2007, William Tanksley, Jr wrote: >> Parameters probably should be a set, and a binding should be a map (an >> unordered set of pairs). > > You're in the wrong discussion group -- concatenative languages don't > have parameters as such :-). The essence of the point under discussion is that this _is_ the Right Group.... Concatenative languages represent function composition by string concatenation resulting in a great simplification in terms of algebraic rewriting of programs. We want to retain and if at all possible, enhance that advantage. The point under discussion is representing parameter passing as stack operations creates a burden that seems superfluous. The implementation is getting in the way of reasoning about the semantics. The question is can we retain functional composition is represented by string concatenation whilst choosing a logically simpler (but implementationwise more complex) representation of parameter passing? John Carter Phone : (64)(3) 358 6639 Tait Electronics Fax : (64)(3) 359 4632 PO Box 1645 Christchurch Email : [email protected] New Zealand