Path: utzoo!attcan!lsuc!maccs!ns
From: ns@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca (Nick Solntseff)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Re: Standards
Keywords: Standards Worry Questions ANSI
Message-ID: <263DA865.2863@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca>
Date: 1 May 90 15:16:52 GMT
References: <10032@sdcc6.ucsd.edu>
Organization: McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Lines: 10

As I have argued in JFAR, vol. 5, No. 3 (1989), pp. 355-356, 

     "Standardization of Forth should only encompass the minimal subset
     containing no more than the words needed to auto-compile a Forth
     system.  In concert with this work, the formal definition of Forth,
     especially, the extension mechanism, should be undertaken to provide
     the theoretical foundation for the total definition of the language."

If you think that this is too big an undertaking, have a look at the parallel   newsgroup on functional languages and study the definition and stabdardization
of SML (Standard Meta Language) which has a lot to show to Forth users.