Re: [stack] Re: unary functions from X to Y?

On Mar 6, 2009, at 1:30 AM, Justin Pombrio wrote:

> If a function g maps all values to the same value (say v), then for  
> every function f, f.g maps all values to v. (here '.' denotes  
> composition)

Aye.

> Joy's 'abort' term breaks this property, as does '=>' in XY.

I was not aware of 'abort'; you are certainly right it seems. As I  
know very little about XY, I'll have to take your word for it  
regarding '=>'.

> I have yet to find a problem with pushing onto the "future" if it is  
> considered a stack rather than a queue.

I believe you're correct. To be honest, I always thought it *was* a  
stack, and was simply called the queue because it held the rest of the  
program "in queue". I now see that the "next" function is at the  
opposite end from where you're operating. Not at all what I expected.  
I can't even fathom what I'd do with that.

I suppose I should actually use XY one of these days... at least  
before I make any more claims about it. Until then, please consider my  
proposal void.

- John