Walter Bright napisał: > bearophile wrote: > > Walter: > > > >> The reason that took so long was that few people were using DbC > >> effectively, so it was a low priority. I originally had high hopes that DbC > >> would produce dramatic improvements in code quality, but the real world > >> results were disappointing.< > > > > After many years and many failed hopes, I think there is no silver bullet in > > programming, so maybe nothing is able to produce "dramatic improvements in > > code quality". > > > > But even if this is true, some things are able to improve coding a bit, like > > unit testing, a well semantically defined language, syntax coloring, quick > > compile-run cycles, OOP for certain kinds of programs, DbC, and so on. Each > > of such things improve the situation only a little, but such improvements > > pile up and most programmers when have tried them don't want to go back to > > miss those things. > > Unit testing has produced a dramatic improvement in coding.
Yes, it's big. Funny that it's not really a technical change but a cultural one -- D just leaves no excuses to even the most stone-age programmers not to test their code. -- Tomek