From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jonathan Groll Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: How to improve the readability of (any) LISP or any highlevel functional language to the level of FORTH ? Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2011 10:57:48 +0200 Message-ID: <877heiquib.wl%lists@groll.co.za> References: <80ceeca0-1d32-47d1-ba96-feb4d9729c3a@v17g2000yqv.googlegroups.com> <87ipy3dooh.fsf@kuiper.lan.informatimago.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1294304310 31476 80.91.229.12 (6 Jan 2011 08:58:30 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2011 08:58:30 +0000 (UTC) To: help-gnu-emacs Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jan 06 09:58:26 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Palfr-0000i3-AT for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 06 Jan 2011 09:58:23 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38799 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Palfq-0004xn-AK for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 06 Jan 2011 03:58:22 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=49081 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PalfL-0004vM-H6 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 06 Jan 2011 03:57:53 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PalfK-0003Mh-Do for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 06 Jan 2011 03:57:51 -0500 Original-Received: from mail.groll.co.za ([166.84.7.40]:39154) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PalfK-0003MF-Bt for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 06 Jan 2011 03:57:50 -0500 Original-Received: from mail.groll.co.za.groll.co.za (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.groll.co.za (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FB685FF21 for ; Thu, 6 Jan 2011 10:57:48 +0200 (SAST) In-Reply-To: <87ipy3dooh.fsf@kuiper.lan.informatimago.com> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.6 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/24.0 Mule/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 1) X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:78255 Archived-At: On Wed, 05 Jan 2011 22:29:50 +0100, "Pascal J. Bourguignon" wrote: > Andrew Haley writes: >=20 > > In comp.lang.forth Xah Lee wrote: > >> > >> lisp syntax does not use operators, or rather, it primarily relies o= n > >> one single match-fix operator the parenthesis. And as a match-fix > >> operator, the word ?pre-fix? doesn't make much sense because that wo= rd > >> is primarly for operators used in a linear (none nested) way. > >> > >> for detail, see: > >> > >> ?The Concepts and Confusions of Prefix, Infix, Postfix and Fully > >> Nested Notations? > >> http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/writ/notations.html > > > > Given that the article even manages to confuse Polish notation and > > Reverse Polish notation, I strongly recommend that everyone avoid it. >=20 > As most of what he writes... Indeed. Most people think that because it is published on the internet it must be right.=20 Cheers, Jonathan -- jjg: Jonathan J. Groll : groll co za has_one { :blog =3D> "http://bloggroll.com" } Reine, reine gueux =C3=A9veille Gomme =C3=A0 gaine, en horreur, taie.