Re: [stack] Properties of Concatenative langauges and Forth

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Christopher Diggins" <[email protected]>
[:]
> 
>>> It's kind of odd to say that Postscript and Forth are Joy-like.
>>
>> Indeed.
> 
> I disagree. Joy is a nearly pure example of a special class of
> programming languages. If you remove the side-effects, you are left
> with a calculus of stacks. Forth and Postscript exhibit some of those
> properties, but not all, and contain a number of odd hacks and special
> constructs. IMO Joy is much more interesting to study formally than
> Forth and Postscript because of its purity.

thanks, yes, i agree with this.

since others have used the terms "interesting" and "uninteresting"
as though they picked out objective properties (rather than just
indicating preferences), i'll note that i find joy interesting, and
forth not.

> 
> See my other post about the evaluation of a concatenative language, to
> get a sense of why Joy is special.

well, it also emerged fully-formed and athena-like from the forehead of 
manfred von thun.

> 
> - Christopher
>