"Strong typing vs. strong testing"

Scott L. Burson Scott at ergy.com
Thu Sep 30 19:56:48 CEST 2010


Ian Collins wrote:
> On 09/30/10 05:57 PM, RG wrote:
>>
>> I'm not saying one should not use compile-time tools, only that one
>> should not rely on them. "Compiling without errors" is not -- and
>> cannot ever be -- be a synonym for "bug-free."
>
> We is why we all have run time tools called unit tests, don't we?
>

My post that kicked off this thread was not cross-posted, so many of the 
participants may not have seen it.  Here it is again, for your convenience:

---------------------

This might have been mentioned here before, but I just came across it: a 
2003 essay by Bruce Eckel on how reliable systems can get built in 
dynamically-typed languages.  It echoes things we've all said here, but 
I think it's interesting because it describes a conversion experience: 
Eckel started out in the strong-typing camp and was won over.

   https://docs.google.com/View?id=dcsvntt2_25wpjvbbhk

-- Scott



More information about the Python-list mailing list