🚀 go-pugleaf

In <1917@optima.cs.arizona.edu> gudeman@cs.arizona.edu (David Gudeman) writes:

>If they
>hadn't caught those errors by static typing they would have caught
>them by testing -- the same way the found the other 90% of the errors.
>This logic error combined with the strident tone of the article
>suggests that your convictions are affecting your thinking.

The real question is how long would it take them to catch those errors
by testing?  The type checker catches them all first time every time.
Admittedly not every error, but reducing the number of errors by 10%
before you even begin testing sounds like a win to me.  

Further, the type checker finds type errors even in code that, for one
reason or another, is never excersized during testing.  Again not every
error, but a 10% reduction is still something.

--
Douglas Surber                 Internet: dnsurber@jsc.nasa.gov
Lockheed                       NASAmail: dnsurber/jsc/nasa
Houston, Texas                 Phone:    713-283-5195
Life can be only understood backwards, but it must be lived forwards.