From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: fac41,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 114809,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public From: Bob Haugen Subject: Re: OO, C++, and something much better! Date: 1997/01/26 Message-ID: <32EB845C.68EB@interaccess.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 212326673 references: <32DFD972.37E4@concentric.net> <5bphq4$5js@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> <32E987FC.1FF2@rase.com> content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii organization: InterAccess, Chicago's best Internet Service Provider mime-version: 1.0 newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada,comp.object,comp.software-eng x-mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win16; U) Date: 1997-01-26T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Robert A Duff wrote: > > In article <32E987FC.1FF2@rase.com>, Tansel Ersavas wrote: > >What is highly debatable? I have used C++ for a long time and now I am > >using Smalltalk, and there is NO comparison in development times. They > >are simply different categories. Turtle vs. Rabbit. > > I don't doubt it. But why do attribute this difference to > static-vs-dynamic typing? Maybe it's caused by having garbage > collection, or having a better predefined library, or having better > debugging tools, or the confusing syntax of type definitions in C++, or > the confusion between arrays and pointers in C++, or any number of other > things. In my experience, it is all of the above PLUS a dynamic style of development that is enabled by dynamic typing. Here is an attempt to describe the style: Each class, and each method of each class, and even individual statements within methods, can be tested immediately from a workspace. The test statements can then be assembled as class methods for regression testing. The class test methods can then be composed into use-case test methods. So you test everything as-you-go, bottom up, without having to create test harnesses, stubs, and other administrative trivia. So you code seldom gets out of control. Lint-style static checks could be included in the above description; I understand some Smalltalk tools are coming on the market to do that. Is there any other environment (except Lisp) that enables such dynamic testing? Bob Haugen Nexgen Software