"Strong typing vs. strong testing"
ian-news at hotmail.com
Fri Oct 1 20:30:31 CEST 2010
On 10/ 2/10 05:18 AM, Pascal J. Bourguignon wrote:
> Seebs<usenet-nospam at seebs.net> writes:
>> 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)
>> 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.
> This is the scenario discussed in this thread, a long is passed to
> maximum without a compiler warning.
Which will cause the test for the bit of code doing the call to fail.
So it fails at run-time with a failed test, just as it would in a
More information about the Python-list