Re: [stack] Notation for typed arrays in Cat

On Apr 4, 2008, at 1:25 PM, William Tanksley, Jr wrote:

> Christopher Diggins <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> ...
>>
>
> I think the reason you feel more comfortable with prefix is simple:
> your type notation is not a concatenative language.

I don't suppose anyone has an idea for concatenative type annotations?  
It seems like a terrible idea, but here's a first stab anyway:

    -- normal
    swap   :: A b c -> A c b
    i      :: A [A -> B] -> B
    unlist :: A {b} [A -> C] [A b {b} -> C] -> C

    -- concatenative?
    swap   :: [A b c] [A c b] 'fn
    i      :: [A [A] [B] 'fn] [B] 'fn
    unlist :: [A b 'list [A] [C] 'fn [A b b list] [C] 'fn] [C] 'fn

Well that's sort of horrible, isn't it. I don't suppose anyone has a  
magical set of type-level combinators to make this beautiful? Is it  
possible to imagine doing this without variable names?

- John