null [re: spec#]
foobar
foo at bar.com
Mon Nov 8 08:12:06 PST 2010
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 building an IDE (Eclipse) extension [in Java :( ] for automatically injecting basic tests to typical programs. This way the tests only slow down the debug build. The production version runs at maximum speed.
>
> 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.
Your conclusion that less types = better is patently incorrect.
While I like Ruby and test driven development that doesn't obviate the need for a strong type system.
tests can only prove that whatever invalid inputs you test for are accounted for. Tests CANNOT prove the correctness of your system for all inputs.
Frankly, I wouldn't use software you wrote with this attitude for a facebook app let alone any system with a smidgen of reliability requirements.
More information about the Digitalmars-d
mailing list