{"push_id":1564095947,"size":1,"distinct_size":1,"ref":"refs/heads/dictionary-scoping","head":"38c002bb6a56bb6e5f654efb7b5c55cccc9298be","before":"d02dd9945122a206b828a24c8226659170c65915","commits":[{"sha":"38c002bb6a56bb6e5f654efb7b5c55cccc9298be","author":{"name":"Yurii Rashkovskii","email":"3549fd90ca36790d5f4ab2a887fd572703ffee56@gmail.com"},"message":"Problem: implementing words without subwords is difficult\n\nTechnically speaking, loaded words *can* define their own\nwords but they will leak into the remainder of the program,\nwhich less than ideal.\n\nUsing stack alone requires a significant amount of juggling\nthat makes writing code incredibly frustrating. I personally\nbelieve that the value of stack based programming languages\nis in concatenative abilities (composition via stack), not\njust being able to do everything by juggling items in the\nstack.\n\nSolution: make all SETs and DEFs done within any closure\nlocal to that closure.\n\nThis means that if eventually we'll need to do code injection\nthat's not injecting what effectively amounts to closures,\nwe'll need to have a separate pass result type that can\nindicate that.","distinct":true,"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/yrashk/PumpkinDB/commits/38c002bb6a56bb6e5f654efb7b5c55cccc9298be"}]}
{"actor":{"display_login":"yrashk"}}