Re: [stack] sweetening concatenative syntax

John Nowak <[email protected]> wrote:
> Stevan Apter wrote:
>  understand. It's clear that 'map' destructures a list and it's clear
>  how both possibilities (the null list and the non-null list) are
>  handled.
>  f map = []
>          [x xs -> x f i xs f map cons]
>        unlist

>  At the very least, it seems that there's a strong argument for
>  offering lambda expressions and a locals syntax.

Of course, what you typed there is just ambiguous, or possibly
requires phenominal lookahead (to see if one of the alternatives
includes a "->" token). But in no case does this functionality REQUIRE
lambdas or locals; why should it? All you're doing is patternmatching.
Consider the famous FunForth, an implementation of a trivial little
patternmatcher in a tiny bit of Forth code
(http://wiki.forthfreak.net/index.cgi?FunForth, note that there
appears to be a display bug in the upper right corner).

>  - John

-Wm