>> And my point is and was: It doesn't *need* to be both type safe *and* reusable, unless you are focusing your energy on writing frameworks or treating type safety as a goal solely for it's own sake.
It does NEED to be BOTH type safe and reusable. 1. Type safety prevent the programmers to make errors. 2. Reusabilty prevent the programmers to implement the same functionality again and again and again and again and again and again... *Code reuse*, also called *software reuse*, is the use of existing software <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software>, or software knowledge, to build new software, following the reusability principles <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reusability>. Reusability In computer science <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_science> and software engineering <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_engineering>, *reusability* is the use of existing assets in some form within the software product development process. Candidate design features for software reuse include: - Adaptable <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adaptability> - Brief: small size - Consistency <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consistency> - Correctness <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correctness_(computer_science)> - Extensibility <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extensibility> - Fast <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed> - Flexible - Generic <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generic_programming> - Localization of volatile (changeable <https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Changeable_design&action=edit&redlink=1>) design assumptions (David Parnas <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Parnas>) - Modularity <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modularity_(programming)> - Orthogonality <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthogonality> - Parameterization <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parameterization> - Simple: low complexity <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complexity_(disambiguation)> - Stability <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stability_Model> under changing requirements <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Requirements> P.S. We continue the discussion about the dangers of `to be both type safe *and* reusable`? Me and most of us MUST focusing our energy on writing high quailty and reusable software. If someone doesn't agree I will not retort. Want write software only for himself? Not a problem, your energy are your energy. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
