Op 2005-10-04, Ron Adam schreef <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Antoon Pardon wrote: >> Op 2005-10-03, Steven D'Aprano schreef <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >>> >>>And lo, one multi-billion dollar Mars lander starts braking either too >>>early or too late. Result: a new crater on Mars, named after the NASA >>>employee who thought the compiler would catch errors. >> >> >> Using (unit)tests will not guarantee that your programs is error free. >> >> So if sooner or later a (unit)tested program causes a problem, will you >> then argue that we should abondon tests, because tests won't catch >> all errors. > > Maybe you need to specify what kind of errors you want to catch. > Different types of errors require different approaches.
I want to catch all errors of course. I know that nothing will ever guarantee me this result, but some things may help in getting close. So if a language provides a feature that can help, I generally think that is positive. That such a feature won't solve all problems shouldn't be considered fatal as some counter arguments seem to suggest. -- Antoon Pardon -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
