Re: accumulator generator

[Dave Long <address@hidden>]

> (define (foo n) 
>   (lambda (i) (set! n (+ n i))))

In Forth, I believe this would be:

: foo create , does> +! ;

and used (for n=17,i={1,2,3...}) like:

17 foo bar
1 bar
2 bar
3 bar ...

I don't know Forth well enough to say how
one gets the incremented value back, but
then, I don't know Scheme well enough to
say how one would there, either.

Perhaps we want the following?
: foo create , does> tuck +! @ ;

-Dave

This exercise is interesting, but may
be moot; it makes judgements based on
the simplest, abstract, case of what
is often expressed as:

(define (fsm state)
  (lambda (update) (next-state! state update)))

: fsm create init-state
      does>  next-state ;

To be able to express trivial problems
elegantly is nice, but I don't think a
working language should lose marks for
overhead unless it remains significant
even for practical problems.