On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 5:35 AM, Chris Warburton <[email protected]>wrote: > > there can often be a semantic cost in trying to assign meaning
to arbitrary combinations of tokens. This can complicate the runtime > (eg. using different stacks for different datatypes) and require > arbitrary/ad-hoc rules and special-cases (eg. empty stacks). > The concatenative language I'm developing uses multiple stacks, but it's about "different stacks for different tasks". I think this works well conceptually, when dealing with concurrent dataflows or workflows. > > I think this semantic cost is often not appreciated, since it's hidden > in the running time rather than being immediately apparent like > malformed programs are. Eh, that isn't an issue, really. Creating strongly type-safe concatenative languages (where types are fully inferred) isn't difficult. We can ensure it is "immediately apparent" that programs are malformed without actually running them.
_______________________________________________ fonc mailing list [email protected] http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
