3 ms·
That's a tautology. By that reasoning, don't bother writing any tests, because all your bugs in production will get past them anyway! My bugs got past my type-
by NickPollard 13y ago
That's a tautology. By that reasoning, don't bother writing any tests, because all your bugs in production will get past them anyway!
My bugs got past my type-checker, but only 100 of them. You have 1000 because the 900 my type checker caught, your dynamic language didn't. Then you go and write unit tests for them, and spend a day writing code that my compiler generated automatically for me.
- grey-area 13y agoIf you can provide statistics on bugs being an order of magnitude higher in dynamic languages to back up your figures here, it would be a far more convincing argument. I'm sure type safety catches a few bugs and prevent some from being made, but does it catch as many as you think?
- brandonbloom 13y ago> By that reasoning ... My reasoning in no way implies that. I simply said that I'm sick of this argument that "if it compiles, it works!" Nobody who knows what they are talking about actually believes that, especially not people who design and build statically typed languages!