So I thought this post about the makeup of the ResolverOne spreadsheet
written in IronPython might be of interest in the light of recent
discussions:
http://www.knowing.net/PermaLink,guid,1e1d2066-8a6f-4eb9-aff8-4298736712bc.aspx
This is the most extreme case I have heard of.
--
Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/?u
Jon Harrop wrote:
> So I thought this post about the makeup of the ResolverOne spreadsheet
> written in IronPython might be of interest in the light of recent
> discussions:
>
> http://www.knowing.net/PermaLink,guid,1e1d2066-8a6f-4eb9-aff8-4298736712bc.aspx
>
> This is the most extreme case I have heard of.
>
The most extreme case of...
1. extreme programming,
2. tunnel vision,
3. trolling,
4. a lack of reading comprehension?
Notice that the title of the blog suggests that nothing can be concluded
based on the information available.
Allen Holub,
"My guess is that a significant portion of those
tests are addressing potential errors that the
compiler would have found in C# or Java."
Never having seen the code, he is ready to chalk it up to dynamic
typing. Very convincing.
Did you bother to read the last line of the blog or follow the final
link of the blog? That line and link are very apropos to you.
My experience is that when someone expends an inordinate amount of
effort trying to convince me of their position, it is because they are
not secure in that position. They are looking for external approval to
assuage their insecurity. Your posts on c.l.l attempting to convince us
of the superiority of static typing and F# suggest to me that you are
insecure in your belief, and I emphasize belief, because there is no,
and probably cannot be, proof. There are diverse approaches to
programming and this is a "Good Thing".
So, I like Common Lisp and dynamic typing. That's why I read this
newsgroup. I've looked into Haskell and ocaml and decided that they do
not fit my requirements. You like F# and static typing. That's great, go
away.
Cheers,
Tom
On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 08:57:40 -0500, Thomas M. Hermann wrote:
> Jon Harrop wrote:
>> So I thought this post about the makeup of the ResolverOne spreadsheet
>> written in IronPython might be of interest in the light of recent
>> discussions:
>>
>> http://www.knowing.net/PermaLink,guid,1e1d2066-8a6f-4eb9-aff8-4298736712bc.aspx
>>
>> This is the most extreme case I have heard of.
>>
>
> The most extreme case of...
>
> 1. extreme programming,
> 2. tunnel vision,
> 3. trolling,
> 4. a lack of reading comprehension?
>
> Notice that the title of the blog suggests that nothing can be concluded
> based on the information available.
>
> Allen Holub,
> "My guess is that a significant portion of those
> tests are addressing potential errors that the
> compiler would have found in C# or Java."
>
> Never having seen the code, he is ready to chalk it up to dynamic
> typing. Very convincing.
You seem to miss the true message of the blog:
when the programmer's skill is limited to guessing, the compiler _has_ to
be smarter ... :-)
Cheers, Ralf Mattes
On 2008-04-15, Ralf Mattes <··@seid-online.de> wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 08:57:40 -0500, Thomas M. Hermann wrote:
>
>> Jon Harrop wrote:
>>> So I thought this post about the makeup of the ResolverOne spreadsheet
>>> written in IronPython might be of interest in the light of recent
>>> discussions:
>>>
>>> http://www.knowing.net/PermaLink,guid,1e1d2066-8a6f-4eb9-aff8-4298736712bc.aspx
>>>
>>> This is the most extreme case I have heard of.
>>>
>>
>> The most extreme case of...
>>
>> 1. extreme programming,
>> 2. tunnel vision,
>> 3. trolling,
>> 4. a lack of reading comprehension?
>>
>> Notice that the title of the blog suggests that nothing can be concluded
>> based on the information available.
>>
>> Allen Holub,
>> "My guess is that a significant portion of those
>> tests are addressing potential errors that the
>> compiler would have found in C# or Java."
>>
>> Never having seen the code, he is ready to chalk it up to dynamic
>> typing. Very convincing.
>
> You seem to miss the true message of the blog:
> when the programmer's skill is limited to guessing, the compiler _has_ to
> be smarter ... :-)
>
>
> Cheers, Ralf Mattes
Dealing with failure is easy: Work hard to improve. Success is also easy
to handle: You've solved the wrong problem. Work hard to improve.
(Alan Perlis)
HTH,
Bruce
--
·······@freeshell.org The black queen chants the funeral march,
The cracked brass bells will ring;
To summon back the fire witch
To the court of the crimson king.