3 ms·
You had bugs because you didn't have adequate tests, not because you were using a dynamic language. That's the anti-pattern.
by secoif 15y ago
You had bugs because you didn't have adequate tests, not because you were using a dynamic language. That's the anti-pattern.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- ericHosick 15y agoOne could also view statically typed languages as having "built in testing", at machine compile time, of types which would be covered by human written tests in a dynamic language. It is easy to say someone doesn't have adequate tests but much harder to make an "adequate" amount of tests in a dynamic language (1). Given a choice, I would rather have a machine checking for correct usage of types as opposed to human written tests. (1) Note I said tests and did not mention systems level behavior verification which is in-depended of a statically or dynamically typed languages.
- DanWaterworth 15y agoThe problem is that to find the most annoying of these bugs using testing alone would have meant that so much time would have been spent writing tests that the productivity gains that you get writing in a dynamic language would have been nullified.