Re: Operator overloading?

In article <v8b04c$137lg$1@dont-email.me>,
Stephen Pelc  <stephen@vfxforth.com> wrote:

On 25 Jul 2024 at 08:30:58 BST, "minforth" <minforth> wrote:
>

Forth has a lot of ‘redundant’ operators for e.g. arithmetic or
stack operations, depending on the data type.
>
There was once an interesting approach for a type-bound layer
on top of standard Forth:
>

https://comp.lang.forth.narkive.com/rexLEBd0/strongforth-implemented-in-ans-forth

>
Unfortunately, the website for downloading strongforth.f
is no longer available.
>
Or has anyone found another way to bundle/overload Forth operators?

>
The standard suggests/specifies that operators such as TO behave as if
they parse. Ignore that for the moment and define

There was a discussion about that before. The stipulaton is null and void.
It was established that there was no way a compliant program could
decide either way. It could be as well eliminated.

<SNIP>

Stephen

Groetjes Albert
--
Don't praise the day before the evening. One swallow doesn't make spring.
You must not say "hey" before you have crossed the bridge. Don't sell the
hide of the bear until you shot it. Better one bird in the hand than ten in
the air. First gain is a cat purring.            - the Wise from Antrim -