I love Factor, but this paper was frustrating to read. They use variables in their rewrite rules even though the whole point of the paper was that you don't nee

I love Factor, but this paper was frustrating to read. They use variables in their rewrite rules even though the whole point of the paper was that you don't need variables. So we never get to see a quotation function written in point-free style. The definitions are never used to actually prove or conjecture anything. Definition 3.4 is particularly content-free. Section 4 contained a 'cool' analogy with nothing to do with this programming style (4.1), 'research in progress' with no prototype (4.2), 'belief' (4.3), reference to 'an as yet unpublished paper' (4.3), and related work that should have been given its own section (4.4). Perhaps it's not satisfied to be a position paper and the authors find themselves trying to show off novel research. I wish they'd resisted the temptation.