Re: Is strong typing worth the cost?

["Chad R. Meiners" <crmeiners@hotmail.com>]

You mentioned dividing one type into two and claimed that you had to X cost
when it should be Y.  For this you could be break the one type into three
types thus keeping Name as a generic placeholder for 'don't care' while
deriving Current_Name and Maiden_Name from Name.  Although this in some
cases may not be a elegant solution; after reading a primer about XP, I have
discovered XP is in some ways against elegant solutions so this just in time
hack should be very appropriate. ;-)   (I wonder what happens when you throw
a non-obviously NP-Complete problem at the XP process infinite loop,
perhaps? ;-)

You  failed to show how strong typing must slow you down in XP.  You can
always elect not to define a type or you could define an object type that
you derive all of your types from.  You showed how you could slow yourself
down intentionally by using strong typing, but you clearly failed to show
how strong typing in and of itself slows you down in XP.

"Darren New" <dnew@san.rr.com> wrote in message
news:3CD1DE85.C00AD2A9@san.rr.com...
> I think I did a fairly good job of showing how it slows down the extreme
> programmer. You just snipped it out. In what way did I fail to address
> your questions?
>