Re: [stack] Canonical LLVM starter language is concatenative...

Good advice that I once got from a lawyer was "don't vague out".
I.e. don't talk in 'hints'. Give the reader/listener something concrete.
Add value. BTW if N readers all add value independantly, that's like
a compositional N-stage data-transformation.

Can your new find/s, compositionally [i.e. serially data-transforming like]:
 find all the files in dir-tree:T |
 which are less than D days old |
 and which have fileName *Name* |
 and which have a line which _starts_ with "Subject:" |
 and where _that_ line has "dog" and has "cat"
 OR where _the Subject: line_ has "fish" AND "cow".


On 4/23/11, William Tanksley, Jr <[email protected]> wrote:
> http://llvm.org/releases/1.1/docs/Stacker.html
>
> I just found this... As of 1.1, LLVM includes as one of its primary
> examples a "Forth-like" language that might possibly serve as the
> foundation for a more complete concatenative language. It's very
> Forthlike, I'd say.
>
> Just in case anyone wants to start a new project :-).
>
> Personally, I'm a little busy learning the J language, which isn't
> concatentive but is from a remarkably different genre of languages
> than the conventional ones. I'm starting this now because I just found
> that JSoftware released it completely as free software (licensed under
> GPL 3), so at last I can learn a complete APL and know that I'll be
> able to use it effectively in my job if I want. (As a side note,
> someone also recently released an open source reimplementation of the
> related "K" language, named "Kona"; I'd start with that, but it's
> currently much less complete.)
>
> -Wm
>