Front Page All Articles Recent Changes Random Article

Contents

Concatenative language

  • ACL
  • Ait
  • Aocla
  • Breeze
  • Callisto
  • Cat
  • Cognate
  • colorForth
  • Concata
  • CoSy
  • Deque
  • DSSP
  • dt
  • Elymas
  • Enchilada
  • ETAC
  • F
  • Factor
  • Fiveth
  • Forth
  • Fourth
  • Freelang
  • Gershwin
  • hex
  • iNet
  • Joy
  • Joy of Postfix App
  • kcats
  • Kitten
  • lang5
  • Listack
  • LSE64
  • Lviv
  • Meow5
  • min
  • Mirth
  • mjoy
  • Mlatu
  • Ode
  • OForth
  • Om
  • Onyx
  • Plorth
  • Popr
  • Porth
  • PostScript
  • Prowl
  • Quest32
  • Quackery
  • r3
  • Raven
  • Retro
  • RPL
  • SPL
  • Staapl
  • Stabel
  • Tal
  • Titan
  • Trith
  • Uiua
  • Worst
  • xs
  • XY
  • 5th
  • 8th

Concatenative topics

  • Compilers
  • Interpreters
  • Type systems
  • Object systems
  • Quotations
  • Variables
  • Garbage collection
  • Example programs

Concatenative meta

  • People
  • Communities

Other languages

  • APL
  • C++
  • Erlang
  • FP trivia
  • Haskell
  • Io
  • Java
  • JavaScript
  • Lisp
  • ML
  • Oberon
  • RPL
  • Self
  • Slate
  • Smalltalk

Meta

  • Search
  • Farkup wiki format
  • Etiquette
  • Sandbox

Factor/Design issues

Mutating vs non-mutating words

Factor has many words that do almost the same thing but have different stack effects, such as remove-nth ( n seq -- seq' ) and delete-nth ( n -- seq ). This results in having to remember two different names for every concept. One proposed solution is to use Scheme's naming convention for mutation, which is a ! at the end of the word. Then we'd have delete-nth for creating new sequences and delete-nth! for mutating existing ones. What would the stack effects be on these new versions?

One issue is that ! is already used for comments. One proposed idea is to change the comment character to #. The # symbol is a word in the make vocabulary, but this could be changed. Ideas?

An alternative approach is to move towards using Persistent data structures for hashtables and vectors and making just a single word do both mutation and non-mutation, with the stack effect being word ( ... old-obj ... -- new-obj ). Maybe you would still need two names. Anyone?

Should integers be sequences?

Should associative lists be first-class tuples or remain as 2arrays?

Erlang-style concurrency or 1:1 native threading?

This revision created on Thu, 18 Sep 2008 19:10:25 by erg

Latest Revisions Edit

All content is © 2008-2024 by its respective authors. By adding content to this wiki, you agree to release it under the BSD license.