Factor: an extensible interactive language

There was always something I liked about Forth when I didn't have to do much stack-thinking. One of the things that felt forth-y to me when I first encountered it was threaded code in Clojure (or any other point-free kind of idiom for that matter). [link] I'll sometimes abuse Python's compose to do similar things I won't send out for code review. Maybe I really should just try to live in Coconut instead of silly stuff like: import chess import chess.svg from IPython.display import SVG, display from functools import reduce def rcompose(*fs): return reduce(lambda f, g: lambda *xs, **ys: g(f(*xs, **ys)), fs) inline_board = rcompose( chess.Board, chess.svg.board, SVG, display) Factor's quotations dealing with stack management weirdness is super nice, too. [link] It still has a bit more stack juggling than I like, though. That could just be a "me" problem. Props to that whole community for their effort. [this video]

Your comment does not make much sense even if it is true. Factor (Forth-like language) implements even its own ":" (defines a word, i.e. a function) using the language itself, it is not builtin, same with "if", and so forth. Thus, "MEMO:" or locals[1] ("::") being implemented as a library does not mean it is a bad thing, on the contrary, in the case of Factor, it makes it quite powerful. The object system is entirely implemented in Factor, too. "Large chunks of functionality are not part of the core language, they are in just as library".[2] And to compare OCaml's type system to Python's is straight out absurd. [1] Locals are entirely implemented in Factor, too, which is only about ~500 lines of code. It is not part of the core language, and on top of that, there is no performance penalty whatsoever! [2] See more here: [this video] .