newRPL - Updated to build 1510 [official build remains at 1487]

[Claudio L.]

(09-08-2021 10:50 PM)JoJo1973 Wrote:  Oops, I re-read it less hastily and I realize that your extension is not in conflict with extended types... Now I understand your point!

Yes, I never meant to break the extended type checking. Just that in my examples I used only integers. But I like the extend type information as a means to reject arguments out of range. Although the automatic argument check will not produce an error message as useful as if the programmer does it manually. I like newRPL style errors like "Expected an integer number" rather than "Bad Argument Type".
The automatic checker will never give an error like "Expected a real number 0<x<30" unfortunately.