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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham 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: 2002-04-30 09:48:21 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.vmunix.org!news2.euro.net!194.168.222.61.MISMATCH!news4-gui.server.ntli.net!ntli.net!news6-win.server.ntlworld.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Is strong typing worth the cost? From: dmjones References: <4519e058.0204290722.2189008@posting.google.com> <3CCE8523.6F2E721C@earthlink.net> <3CCEB246.9090009@worldnet.att.net> Organization: Knowledge Software Message-ID: User-Agent: Xnews/L5 Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 16:48:18 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 62.252.22.178 X-Complaints-To: abuse@ntlworld.com X-Trace: news6-win.server.ntlworld.com 1020185298 62.252.22.178 (Tue, 30 Apr 2002 17:48:18 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 17:48:18 BST Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:23280 Date: 2002-04-30T16:48:18+00:00 List-Id: Boys and girls, > Seriously, any software that reports itself as safe and > correct must perform a significant amount of what the old Who mentioned safe and correct? This is avoiding the base issue. Where is the evidence of a worthwhile cost/benefit for strong typing? If I had posted to comp.lang.basic asking about strong typing I'm sure I would have had lots of well meaning people tell me that strong typing was a waste of time and money. They might even have thrown in some references to web pages, papers backing up this view. Is this what it boils down to? Is choice of type system based on faith only? Is experimental evaluation a dead duck in software engineering? http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/lukowicz94experimental.html ps. Jim you were the last to post and get the semi-rant. Those before you are just as guilty of being faith based (if that is what it is).