Re: [stack] Re. what's the point of cat-like ?

chris glur <[email protected]> wrote:
> When it's too hard to explain, they revert to "try it, you'll like it",
> or the new buzz-phrase: "good experience".

Yup, understood.

> Previously when I queried/criticised "what's the point of cat-like?",
> I got hysterical threats of being cut-off the mailing list. Has that
> happened, or has it just fizzled ?

Don't worry -- I never considered throwing you off the list before
this. So clearly, the hysteria level wasn't bad enough then.

> My crit/prompt gave good results
> in widening my OWN view.  For those who can understand, here a paste of
> my preliminary design notes towards a cat-like labour saver:-

Cool! I hope it's a lot of fun -- I'm having fun with my own
concatenative toy (although mine's a LOT less practical than the one
you're thinking about here).

> Q. are there, for cat-like design, any published: 'axioms', 'patterns';
>   rather than "this feels good"?

Yes; but it's generally under the rubric of specific languages. Factor
has some idioms of its own; Forth has a LOT (see the "1x Forth" talk
Chuck Moore gave).

-Wm