http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/concatenative/ Discuss the concatenative variety of computer languages: Joy, Forth, Postscript Wed, 09 Jul 2008 05:30:38 GMT John Nowak http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/concatenative/message/4110 http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/concatenative/message/4110 I hand-translated some very simple first order concatenative programs to a dataflow representation. I implemented the dataflow versions in Pure Data Thu, 19 Jun 2008 15:25:05 GMT John Nowak http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/concatenative/message/4109 http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/concatenative/message/4109 ... Such an approach is the only way I can think of to solve the problem. Unfortunately, such an approach is also impossible (or, at least, requires far too Thu, 19 Jun 2008 13:27:50 GMT William Tanksley, Jr http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/concatenative/message/4108 http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/concatenative/message/4108 ... Well, you've got my sympathy... That's an unfortunate dilemma. It looks like this model of a first-order language works very poorly with concatenativity. Thu, 19 Jun 2008 08:49:34 GMT John Nowak http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/concatenative/message/4107 http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/concatenative/message/4107 Slava has given an interesting example that has made me rethink getting rid of the n-ary 'map' functional: Given an array like {1, f, f, f, 2, f, f, 3, 4, f}, Thu, 19 Jun 2008 07:50:49 GMT John Nowak http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/concatenative/message/4106 http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/concatenative/message/4106 I've recently been considering a concatenative language variant without first-class functions. In such a language, you'd have a clear hierarchy with objects at Wed, 18 Jun 2008 12:07:45 GMT John Nowak http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/concatenative/message/4105 http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/concatenative/message/4105 ... Ah, I knew I didn't explain that properly (well, at all really). Let me recap briefly so I can be sure I've covered it. Factor has a family cleave Wed, 18 Jun 2008 00:03:57 GMT William Tanksley, Jr http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/concatenative/message/4104 http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/concatenative/message/4104 ... I don't get it. Can you provide a specific counterexample where this doesn't receive a type? It seems to me that there are two possibilities: 1. The types Mon, 16 Jun 2008 22:01:22 GMT John Nowak http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/concatenative/message/4103 http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/concatenative/message/4103 ... Aye. A few times now I've asked him how he'd write something, typically after I'd already given it much thought, and the result has always been very Mon, 16 Jun 2008 20:55:57 GMT William Tanksley, Jr http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/concatenative/message/4102 http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/concatenative/message/4102 I _like_ Slava's code there. ... Keep in mind that these "cleave combinators" are not actually combinators in this little language... They're part of the Sat, 14 Jun 2008 09:46:10 GMT John Nowak http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/concatenative/message/4101 http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/concatenative/message/4101 For the sake of completeness, Slava offered this definition for the ... This is quite a bit better than the version given here: Sat, 14 Jun 2008 09:04:42 GMT John Nowak http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/concatenative/message/4100 http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/concatenative/message/4100 Everyone likes debating matters of syntax, right? Here's a (rather monolithic) way of writing the quadratic formula in Factor: [ rot 4 * * [ [ neg ] [ sq ] bi Sat, 14 Jun 2008 00:33:29 GMT pml060912 http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/concatenative/message/4099 http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/concatenative/message/4099 ... Just as a reminder, my occasional work on Furphy is about that: http://users.beagle.com.au/peterl/furphy.html - PML. Fri, 13 Jun 2008 20:09:28 GMT William Tanksley, Jr http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/concatenative/message/4098 http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/concatenative/message/4098 ... You're right; the access this provides to the source code is extremely limited. ... Some programmers prefer not to receive punishment from compilers... Fri, 13 Jun 2008 00:39:40 GMT John Nowak http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/concatenative/message/4097 http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/concatenative/message/4097 ... Roughly speaking, yes. Forth's words aren't pure in the same sense as functions are in Joy and FP, but if you ignore that, I'd say it qualifies. Forth also Thu, 12 Jun 2008 14:53:46 GMT William Tanksley, Jr http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/concatenative/message/4096 http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/concatenative/message/4096 ... Hmm. So is Forth a first-order language based on composition? Seems that way. Mind you, Forth wasn't designed with that in mind, so its syntax is a