Daniel Fischer <[email protected]> writes: > On Friday 18 June 2010 12:31:26, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic wrote: >> Pete Chown <[email protected]> writes: >> > One thing I'm curious about is Haskell versus Python or Ruby. Code in >> > those languages is, IMO, prone to type related bugs because there is >> > no compile-time checking. On the other hand, I would expect the >> > density' of the code to be similar to Haskell. You can do a lot of >> > the same things, although they support an OO programming style too. >> >> Haven't you heard? Enough unit tests give you almost the same security >> as a good static type system at the expense of more code! >> >> Uh, wait, why is that an advantage again? :p > > Duh, because it's much faster to develop in a dynamically typed language. > Writing out all those type signatures costs time. Much more time than > writing a few dozen unit tests per function, right?
Of course! And adding in documentation saying what kind of values are expected is also just as trivial! -- Ivan Lazar Miljenovic [email protected] IvanMiljenovic.wordpress.com _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
