Re: [stack] Barebone implementation of concatenative language in c or c++

We seem to disagree about what a language is. In my dictionary a language consists of: pronunciation, syntax, semantics. It seems to me that stack or rewriting is part of the semantics and therefore part of the language. If I have a simple expression like: 2 3 +, there is no way for you to convince me that this must be executed on a stack. I only see three symbols that in the next evaluation step are replaced by one symbol.

Making a lazy Joy is quite unnecessary, because there is already a lazy library: http://www.latrobe.edu.au/philosophy/phimvt/joy/jp-reprod.html

--- In [email protected], John Cowan <cowan@...> wrote:
> > The current implementation uses a stack, yes. But I was not talking
> > about implementations, I was talking about the language and the
> > way that I, as a person, can evaluate expressions in whatever
> > order I like. If I can do that, mentally or on paper, it is a
> > property of Joy, the language.
> 
> Only it's not.