Re: [stack] sweetening concatenative syntax

On Mar 5, 2008, at 5:26 PM, Stevan Apter wrote:

> temperament, taste, and further imponderable subjectivities.

Well, perhaps this is worth testing then. Here's how I'm suggesting one
could write a non-tail-recursive 'map' in terms of 'cons' and 'unlist':

f map = unlist:
  []
  [x xs -> (f x) (map xs f) cons]

> i want my concatenativity neat, straight no chaser.

How would you personally write this in a purely concatenative form? No
cheating by using combinators like 'fold'; you only get to use 'cons' (a
{a} -> {a}) and 'unlist' (A {b} [A -> C] [A b {b} -> C] -> C).

- John