Re: Type checking (was: The strengths of FORTH)

On Apr 9, 12:08 pm, "Mark W. Humphries" <m...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On Apr 9, 7:17 pm, ken...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:
> >  Besides I don't see the point of this anyway. If I wanted strong type
> > checking I would be using Pascal not Forth in the first place. Forth
> > strengths are simplicity and factoring. If this means that the
> > programmer has to keep track of what variable is which then so be it.
> > Strong type checking is a method of making the compiler find errors
not
> > the programmer.
> I concur, it seems people there are always eager to make Forth more
> like Pascal, C, Python, or what-not. I don't see the point.

If I want my Forth compiler to refuse to run source unless its
statically type safe, then by jimminy my Forth compiler should do
that. Its not supposed to be up to my Forth compiler whether it does
or does not do what I want it to do, its supposed to be up to me.

And it makes no sense that I should have to abandon my command line
and incremental compilation in order to get it, if for whatever reason
I want to have it.