null [re: spec#] (on dynamic typing)

Bruno Medeiros brunodomedeiros+spam at com.gmail
Thu Nov 25 08:14:11 PST 2010


On 08/11/2010 14:35, steveh wrote:
> bearophile Wrote:
>
>> Simen kjaeraas:
>>
>>> Context-sensitive constructor disabling is a theoretical possibility, but
>>> seems to me to conflict with D's other goals.
>>
>> It's time to update those goals.
>
> I studied the situation further. Now I've decided to leave D. I tried to cope with all overly complex type system quirks, but have had enough of it now. These two months with D truly opened my eyes. It means I won't touch C++ or Java either.
>
> My next goal is to use an untyped (less types = better) language which concentrates on cool syntax. Intensive test suites guarantee safety and quality. An extreme version of TDD.
>

I'm often hearing that argument from the new dynamic languages crowd: 
that less types = better, and that lots of tests guarantee safety and 
quality.

* lifts hands *
What they don't realize, is that static typing is just compile-time 
unit-testing. :)
* hands the spoon back to Neo *

> Another solution is exploratory testing. I test stuff interactively using a REPL. These reports and guidelines can be written down in .doc word documents. I learnt this idea from Paul Graham and his new language.

Paul Graham. lol.

-- 
Bruno Medeiros - Software Engineer


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list