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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,d89b08801f2aacae X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-05-06 08:33:42 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!HSNX.atgi.net!newsfeed.sjc.globix.net!cyclone-sf.pbi.net!151.164.30.35!cyclone.swbell.net!bos-service1.ext.raytheon.com!bos-service2.ext.raytheon.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Message-ID: <3CD6A250.875BD736@despammed.com> From: Wes Groleau Reply-To: wesgroleau@despammed.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en,es-MX,es,pt,fr-CA,fr MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Is strong typing worth the cost? References: <4519e058.0204290722.2189008@posting.google.com> <3CCE8523.6F2E721C@earthlink.net> <3CCEB246.9090009@worldnet.att.net> <3CCFD76A.A60BB9A8@flash.net> <3CD0A3B8.7B7C8622@san.rr.com> <3CD15FAE.6DEE0AD@despammed.com> <3CD16B60.93078396@san.rr.com> <3CD1B496.DBE8ADC4@san.rr.com> <3CD1BACC.8938FEAB@despammed.com> <3CD1D17B.F60DCB89@san.rr.com> <3CD2AD5F.93BB740A@despammed.com> <3CD2B952.44E58DF6@san.rr.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Mon, 06 May 2002 10:33:36 -0500 NNTP-Posting-Host: 151.168.144.162 X-Complaints-To: news@ext.ray.com X-Trace: bos-service2.ext.raytheon.com 1020699222 151.168.144.162 (Mon, 06 May 2002 11:33:42 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 06 May 2002 11:33:42 EDT Organization: Raytheon Company Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:23585 Date: 2002-05-06T10:33:36-05:00 List-Id: > > It can > > even be something that you KNOW will fail--in > > which case, why waste time running the test? > > Because you *don't* know it will fail. And perhaps adding that > declaration made some *other* test fail. So now you know it was the very If it's a stub, you _do_ know it will fail. And if you aren't sure whether a stub will break something it doesn't call, you REALLY chose the wrong language. > > Anyone who feeds you slogans instead of information > > is selling something. The above slogan is selling XP. > > Well, anyone who bases their opinion of an entire programming > methodology on "the first thing that caught my eye" is unlikely to make I don't base my opinion on it. I just couldn't help but notice the obvious marketing technique in the very statement that puts down marketing. -- Wes Groleau http://freepages.rootsweb.com/~wgroleau