Arc Forumnew | comments | leaders | submitlogin
2 points by rocketnia 2524 days ago | link | parent

In Kernel, applicatives (procedures) have underlying operatives (fexprs), and 'wrap is the axiomatic way to make an applicative, kinda like Arc's use of 'annotate to make macros. I don't know whether or not I'm not particularly attached to 'wrap; I kind of included it on a whim in order to support a nifty definition of 'fn.

As far as the bug goes, I still haven't tested the code, but here are a few fixes I just pushed, which may or may not be relevant:

   (def feval (expr (o env fenv*))
     (case type.expr
       cons  (fapply (feval car.expr env) cdr.expr env)
  -    sym   do.env.expr
  +    sym   (fenv-get env expr)
   ; The 'applicative type is totally Kernel's idea.
   (def fapply (op args (o env fenv*))
     (case type.op
       fexpr        (rep.op env args)
  -    applicative  ((rep rep.op) env (map [feval _ env] args))
  +    applicative  (fapply unwrap.op (map [feval _ env] args) env)
                    (apply op (map [feval _ env] args))))
  +; We use a singleton list so that an applicative can wrap an
  +; applicative. Using 'annotate does nothing to a value that's already
  +; of the given type.
   (fdef wrap (fexpr)
  -  (annotate 'applicative fexpr))
  +  (annotate 'applicative list.fexpr))
   (fdef unwrap (applicative)
  -  rep.applicative)
  +  rep.applicative.0)