Nevertheless an interesting idea. Unix pipes are basically concatenative, I've often thought how much mileage you could get out of going more in this direction.
Having said that. This has a lot of forth in it. (Dup, over, rot) I'm not sure the forth way, of passing options in the stack would necessarily work so well in a shell.
You could easily make CUNIX by starting with a log containing the state of a PDP11 at boot and a pure function which appends ignore previous input and the next PDP11 state to it.
It's more than just a grammar. But specifically on that note, I'm assuming you know a POSIX Shell language. Spend some time with Forth and ask yourself if these are experientially the same thing.
I wish I were half as productive as Devine Lu Linvega. Perhaps I should get a sailboat and spend my time hacking without distraction, but I am not a fan of the seas.
13 comments
[ 4.8 ms ] story [ 41.5 ms ] threadNevertheless an interesting idea. Unix pipes are basically concatenative, I've often thought how much mileage you could get out of going more in this direction.
Having said that. This has a lot of forth in it. (Dup, over, rot) I'm not sure the forth way, of passing options in the stack would necessarily work so well in a shell.
Probably not literally realizable right now, but IMHO, the closer we can get, the better
You might enjoy the "Shell Has a Forth-like Quality" article. It's changed my shell scripting a lot.
https://www.oilshell.org/blog/2017/01/13.html
Equifinality is extremely misleading.
I wish I were half as productive as Devine Lu Linvega. Perhaps I should get a sailboat and spend my time hacking without distraction, but I am not a fan of the seas.