Re: [stack] stackless concatenativity + visual dataflow

On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 9:48 PM, John Nowak <[email protected]> wrote:
> I suppose all there is to do at this point is implement an interpreter
> for such a language and see how painful the "fixed arity" restriction
> is relative to its benefits.

Based on the things I've written in Factor a 'fixed arity' restriction
would have little to no effect on what I've written. It did in the
past when 'curry' was discouraged and quotations passed to 'map' and
the like would often access items deeper in the stack. For example:

  5 { 1 2 3 } [ over + ] map
  => { 6 7 8 }

A map-with operation was eventually provided to make this easier:

  5 { 1 2 3 } [ + ] map-with

Now with the composition of quotations being more acceptable in factor
(previously composing quotations caused performance problems) words
like curry can be used:

  5 { 1 2 3 } swap [ + ] curry map

(There's actually a word 'with' that makes this more readable).

Would your restriction still allow curry, compose, etc?

Chris.
-- 
http://www.bluishcoder.co.nz