Re: [stack] Joy's relationship to FP + a Joy variant with combining forms

John Nowak <[email protected]> wrote:
> William Tanksley, Jr wrote:
>> In short, I this looks like a nice model to give a concatenative stack
>> language disciplined access to its own source code.

> Or, in the 5th view, a disciplined way of manipulating its own
> functions.

You're right; the access this provides to the source code is extremely limited.

> This is in contrast to Joy's "undisciplined" way of
> manipulation where you can write combinators that seem to be more than
> the sum of their parts. For example, it becomes possible to write
> things like '[dup i] dup i' that fail to terminate even though no
> recursive combinator was employed. Of course, "undisciplined" is a
> horribly loaded way of saying this.

Some programmers prefer not to receive punishment from compilers...
They seem to believe that compilers dish out enough punishment without
the compiler author adding more. :-)

So I don't think "undisciplined" is so horrible.

> - John

-Wm