Re: [stack] sweetening concatenative syntax

John Nowak <[email protected]> wrote:
>  William Tanksley, Jr wrote:
>  > But in no case does this functionality REQUIRE
>  > lambdas or locals; why should it? All you're doing is patternmatching.

>  I'm actively trying to avoid defining the language in terms of pattern
>  matching. Here, 'unlist' is just a normal function. But yes, of course
>  it doesn't require locals. You could do this as well:
>     map = swap
>           []
>           [rot dup 2keep swap map cons]
>         unlist

...but you're still doing patternmatching. Aren't you? What am I missing?

>  Anyway, saying that "all your doing is pattern matching" gets more
>  complicated when types are involved.

Oh, I agree.

>  when matching. Therefore, any sort of general pattern matching
>  facility would need to be implemented into the language proper, and
>  ideally I'd like to avoid that as it complicates things.

Well, if you're incorporating types into the language, you've got to
handle the effects of that.

>  - John

-Wm