In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Hans Nowak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Paul Rubin wrote:
>
>> You should write unit tests either way, but in Python you're relying
>> on the tests to find stuff that the compiler finds for you with Java.
>
>As I wrote on my weblog a while ago, I suspect that this effect is
>largely psychological. You jump through hoops, declaring types all over
>the place, checking exceptions, working around the language's
>limitations, etc. So when your code compiles, it *feels* safer. Like
>you're at least part of the way towards ensuring correctness. All that
>work must be good for *something*, right? Never mind that when writing
>unit tests for a dynamic language, you don't check for these things at
>all. How often do you explicitly check types in Python unit tests?
>IMHO, when using a dynamic language, you don't need most of the checks
>that Java, C# and their ilk force upon you.
.
.
.
Me, too.
That is, while I have a LOT of respect for Paul's programming
and judgment, and question myself when I'm on the side opposite
him, I ultimately value type declarations in languages such as
Java as more cost than benefit.
It's a funny position to hold, because I simultaneously recognize
that type theory is one of computing's strongest theoretical
achievements, AND I am a strong advocate of "static" syntax checkers
such as PyChecker. Still, I see TDD as the right place to start.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
