In article ,   
   Krishna Myneni   wrote:   
   >I'm wondering what the CS Forth users and Forth systems developers make   
   >of the renewed recent push for use of memory-safe languages. Certainly   
   >Forth can add the type of contractual safety requirements e.g.,   
   >implementing bounds checking, of a "memory-safe language". Do we need to   
   >work on libraries for these provisions?   
   >   
   >Opinions?   
      
   There is no way Forth can be a safe language in the sense of   
   algol/pascal/ada/go.   
   It is in the lane of assembler/Fortran/c.   
   The most that can be done implement a safe language on top of it,   
   that makes not a lot of sense.   
      
   >Krishna Myneni   
   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 -   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)