Re: [stack] sweetening concatenative syntax

> over the years i've come to believe that simplicity and low code-mass
> in the language implementation is the best way to reduce the worst kind
> of errors in end-user code. i can't help but notice how frequently haskell
> and ocaml programmers (at least, those without black-belts) struggle with
> their respective type-systems.

And those with black-belts are so proud of themselves they think
trivial software is worth publishing in academic journals. Anyway, for
me happiness is in between the two. I like C# for this reason, as must
or little type safety as you want.

> the ramification of type-theories into
> so many alternative approaches alone should indicate that something is
> amiss.

I don't quite follow what you are getting at

On another note, I would really appreciate a list of "must-have" array
primitives. Which ones need to be implemented in a language (so that
they can be leverage by optimizers) and which ones can be defined as
libraries. The Heron 0.19 release is around the corner, and I would
like a happy Stevan Apter on my side. :-)

I have also been wondering what it means to add a vector of two
elements to a vector of four elements which I believe you mentioned in
an earlier post. In my little type-safe world, this is undefined.

Christopher Diggins