On 04/06/2015, at 2:52 AM, Ryan Gonzalez wrote:
> isn't this basically stack-oriented programming without a stack?
Like "Forth"?
Nope. Nothing like that except it shares the "value free"
associativity property.
Remember pipelines are only the simple functional
stage. I haven't got up to feedba
So...
...
isn't this basically stack-oriented programming without a stack?
Related project of interest:
http://code.google.com/p/anic
On June 2, 2015 7:10:08 PM CDT, john skaller
wrote:
>There is about to be a major paradigm shift in the world of
>programming: Active Programming.
>
>I have
On 03/06/2015, at 6:41 PM, srean wrote:
> This ought to be a blog post.
Blogs are too much work. No one reads mine anyhow.
No one reads the email either but its easier to do them.
> And if you are still in touch with Stepanov, I think he would be quite
> excited to read this.
I'm not in touch
Ah, OK! Another programming rule:
"When you're confused: KISS"
So instead of trying to wire a source to two transducers with tee,
I just wired a source to two sinks, so I got this to work easily then:
spawn_fthread$
src |-> xduce 42 |->
(
xduce 11 |-> sink,
xduce 22 |-> sin
Ok, so you can now do this:
(s1, s2) |-> (t1,t2)
This can be used to:
(a) connect two sources to two transducers to make two new sources
(b) connect two pairs of transducers to get a new pair or transducers
(c) connect two transducers to two sinks to get two sink
