Re: [stack] the concatenative wikipedia article

On Jan 2, 2009, at 7:07 PM, John Nowak wrote:

> 've not been able to find anything. The only thing I've seen along
> this lines has been casual comments in the #concatenative chat room on
> freenode. In either case, I don't think it really belongs in the
> article. I don't think "dynamically typed" is a good term either, but
> we're stuck with it. The same goes for "strong typing" which is used
> to mean almost anything.

In retrospect, this is a pretty flawed analogy.

Perhaps it is worthwhile for the article to say that the term  
"concatenative" is relatively new and its meaning is not well- 
established. That's different than saying it isn't useful, which I  
think it clearly is (as we, you know, use it).

- John