Re: [stack] language hierarchy
Stevan Apter <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lang.concatenative |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
you know, that article crossed my mind as i hit enter. further evidence that the quickest route to knowledge is to deny some proposition before a large, argumentative audience. (i'm sure some of you have heard the following sidney morgenbesser story: at a colloquium on the philosophy of language, the speaker observed that one often finds double-negation signifying the affirmative, but never double-affirmation signifying the negative, to which morgenbesser replied, "yeah yeah.") ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christopher Diggins" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2007 6:18 PM Subject: Re: [stack] language hierarchy >> i recall a conversation with some of the APL guys at one of the >> minnowbrook conferences in which i asked if anyone had ever found a >> use for a third-order function. of course, it was possible to add >> the machinery for defined functions of any order, but could anyone >> think of a use for this? > > Parsers? > > http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?aid=44161 > > - Christopher >