Rant after trying Rust a bit

[Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d]

On 7/26/15 3:54 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 7/26/2015 8:20 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> On 7/25/15 6:54 PM, deadalnix wrote:
>>> On Saturday, 25 July 2015 at 10:05:35 UTC, Tofu Ninja wrote:
>>>> On Saturday, 25 July 2015 at 09:40:52 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>>>>> if the template body uses an interface not present in the type and
>>>>> not checked for in the constraint, you will *still* get a compile
>>>>> time error.
>>>>
>>>> But only if the template gets instantiated with a bad type. Unit tests
>>>> don't catch every thing and have to be written properly. A proper type
>>>> system should catch it.
>>>
>>> This unitest argument is becoming ridiculous. Unless some strong
>>> argument is brought to the table that this differs from the "dynamic
>>> typing is not a problem if you write unitest" we we all should know is
>>> bogus at this point, it can't be taken seriously.
>>
>> To me that's self understood. Run time is fundamentally different from
>> everything preceding it. -- Andrei
>
> Unit tests are also not exclusively about runtime. Using a unit test to
> instantiate a template is a compile time test.

YES! For templates unittests have a dual role. -- Andrei