🚀 go-pugleaf

In article  <2594@ficc.uu.net> peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) writes:
>I mentioned in the previous message that I couldn't think of any dataflow
>languages, off the top of my head. Of course I should be given a good swift
>kick for forgetting Icon here...

Ahem.  I hate to nit-pick, but my understanding of dataflow languages
is that they are non-procedural languages based on something similar
to circuit diagrams.  Icon is an expression-based procedural language
where expressions may produce multiple results under goal-directed
evaluation (sort of like Lisp with more readable syntax and Prolog's
backtracking mechanism).  No doubt Mr. da Silva was thinking of some
other language.