"Strong typing vs. strong testing"

Seebs usenet-nospam at seebs.net
Fri Oct 1 16:49:36 CEST 2010

On 2010-10-01, Pascal J. Bourguignon <pjb at informatimago.com> wrote:
>                                 static              dynamic
> compiler detects wrong type     fail at compile     fails at run-time
>                                                     (with exception
>                                                     explaining this is
>                                                     the wrong type)

Unless, of course, the "wrong type" happens to be compatible enough to
pass.  In which case, it's unclear whether it is the "wrong type" or not.

> compiler passes wrong type      wrong result        fails at run-time
>                                 (the programmer     (with exception
>                                 spends hours        explaining this is
>                                 finding the         the wrong type)
>                                 problem)

I have no clue what exact scenario you're talking about here.  I've never
seen a bug that could plausibly be described as "compiler passes wrong
type" which wasn't picked up quickly by running with more warnings enabled.

And on the other end of things, it is not always obvious or straightforward
to figure out *why* the dynamic language has ended up with something of the
wrong type, or what's wrong with that type.

Copyright 2010, all wrongs reversed.  Peter Seebach / usenet-nospam at seebs.net
http://www.seebs.net/log/ <-- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!
I am not speaking for my employer, although they do rent some of my opinions.

More information about the Python-list mailing list