Re: [stack] sweetening concatenative syntax

Minor issues with the previous email:

1. I fell back to a Cat-like syntax for type definitions. Here are the  
correct notations for 'i', 'map', and 'unlist':

     i      :: A [A -> B] -> B
     map    :: (List a) [a -> b] -> (List b)
     unlist :: A (List b) [A -> C] [A b (List b) -> C] -> C

Arguably there should be a type abbreviation for '(List a)'; perhaps  
'{a}'.

2. The phrase "allows editors to automatically intent" should read  
"allows editors to automatically INDENT".

3. By "it's harder for machines to generate valid code", I mean that  
it is harder to generate *source* code when compiling to a language  
with indentation-sensitive syntax. Explicit paired delimiters are  
easier to deal with.

4. It's too long. Unfortunately, I don't have the time to write a  
shorter version.