Carmack about static analysis

[Bruno Medeiros]

On 10/02/2012 18:19, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 2/10/2012 3:10 AM, deadalnix wrote:
>> Typeless is great when sketching some piece of code, but you'll way
>> more problem
>> at the end.
>
> I've heard people say that typeless is just as good, because you load
> them up with unit tests that verify the types. To me, this doesn't seem
> like any advantage. I'd rather have the language automatically check
> things for me, rather than worrying about having complete unit test
> coverage, let alone the bother of writing them.

That why I tell those people to just not think of static typing as 
static typing, but as "compile-time unit tests"... ;)


-- 
Bruno Medeiros - Software Engineer