Re: [stack] Re: the concatenative wikipedia article

On Jan 1, 2009, at 2:28 AM, John Nowak wrote:

>
> On Dec 31, 2008, at 11:07 PM, Don Groves wrote:
>
>>> 3. There's no reason that the data structure the functions operate  
>>> on
>>> be a list or a stack. I recently proposed a language using vectors  
>>> in
>>> the style of More's array theory. Earlier today, Chris proposed a
>>> language based on a deque. I believe XY works on a stack/queue  
>>> tuple.
>>> Other possibilities are easy to dream up.
>>
>> The reason I picked "sequence" is that it seems to be the most basic
>> ordered structure.
>
> They need not be ordered. Consider a language that passed around a
> dictionary. Primitive operations would assume their arguments were
> stored at particular names. Essentially, it would be something like a
> register machine (as opposed to a stack machine).
>
> No, it isn't *useful*, but I'm not sure if you'd want to exclude it.

Sure it's useful. We do that now only we call them "files."
--
don



> - John
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>