Re: [stack] Abstracting away the complexity is the goal.

John Nowak <[email protected]> wrote:

> I'm not sure if this fits anyone's definition of a "one dimensional
> facility", but it may be of interest:
> http://www.eecs.usma.edu/webs/people/okasaki/jfp03.ps
>

Indeed it is; it's Okasaki's narrative in which he helps a student whose
keyboard has lost its parentheses, thus requiring him to write only "flat"
programs. Entertaining. That was one of my inspirations for searching for
the zeroone programming language, which Kerby (
http://tunes.org/~iepos/joy.html) finally helped me find.

Kerby modified his combinator search program to work with it (see above);
Apter wrote his own implementation (at http://www.nsl.com/k/10.k; named 10,
probably because APL users are used to reading everything backwards ;-); and
I wrote my own search program and implementation (at
http://bitbucket.org/wtanksleyjr/tworing/).

A flat concatenative language doesn't meet what Glur expects, though. He
wants a flat language without any capacity for explicit dataflow
manipulation; and that's the one I said won't be a complete programming
language.

- jn
>

-Wm


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]