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

Mark W. Humphries wrote:
> 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.

It's fun. And we can show that it's doable. It's like the more than 20 OOP
extensions to Forth: Some people are violently opposing OOP, so an OOP
Forth is just making Forth more like what-not (Smalltalk, C++, Python).
Others find OOP quite useful.

An ANS Forth version of StrongForth (strong.fs) would make Stephen
Becher's
work more accessible than the DOS version. I don't know if it makes it
more
useful (the debate is open ;-), but at least people can give it a try.

-- 
Bernd Paysan
"If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself"
http://www.jwdt.com/~paysan/