In article <641a30b8-c659-4212-9f31-b9eb401ad...@r37g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>,
barisa wrote:
>On Apr 4, 9:57=A0pm, bearophileh...@lycos.com wrote:
>
>> that. Don't fight the language. Use doctests). My other suggestion is
>> to read code coming from 5+ Python programs written by other
>> (differ
Plenty. Try github.com for starters.
-Original Message-
From: python-list-bounces+nick=stinemates@python.org
[mailto:python-list-bounces+nick=stinemates@python.org] On Behalf Of
barisa
Sent: Sunday, April 05, 2009 10:22 AM
To: python-list@python.org
Subject: Re: Testing dynamic
On Apr 4, 9:57 pm, bearophileh...@lycos.com wrote:
> that. Don't fight the language. Use doctests). My other suggestion is
> to read code coming from 5+ Python programs written by other
> (different) people. You will see how to use Python.
>
> Bye,
> bearophile
Is there some online repository for
grkunt...:
> If I am writing in Python, since it is dynamically, but strongly
> typed, I really should check that each parameter is of the expected
> type, or at least can respond to the method I plan on calling ("duck"
> typing). Every call should be wrapped in a try/except statement to
> prevent
This may be obvious but, clearly there are (at least) two general
types of errors: those caused by data external to the program and
those caused by bugs in the program. For all inputs coming into the
program from outside, such as user inputs and data coming over a
network, the inputs must be comple
On Sat, 2009-04-04 at 06:37 -0700, grkunt...@gmail.com wrote:
> If I am writing in Python, since it is dynamically, but strongly
> typed, I really should check that each parameter is of the expected
> type, or at least can respond to the method I plan on calling ("duck"
> typing). Every call should
On Sat, 04 Apr 2009 07:37:44 -0700, grkuntzmd wrote:
> I am a Java developer. There, I said it :-).
>
> When I am writing code, I can rely on the compiler to confirm that
> any methods I write will be called with parameters of the "right"
> type. I do not need to test that parameter #1 really is
On Apr 4, 11:17 am, Emmanuel Surleau
wrote:
> On Saturday 04 April 2009 15:37:44 grkunt...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > I am a Java developer. There, I said it :-).
Don't worry. I also do terrible things to support my family...
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
andrew cooke wrote:
> if you are going to do that, stay with java. seriously - i too, am a java
> developer about half the time, and you can make java pretty dynamic if you
> try hard enough. look at exploiting aspects and functional programming
> libraries, for example.
also, of course, scala.
On Saturday 04 April 2009 15:37:44 grkunt...@gmail.com wrote:
> I am a Java developer. There, I said it :-).
>
> When I am writing code, I can rely on the compiler to confirm that
> any methods I write will be called with parameters of the "right"
> type. I do not need to test that parameter #1 re
grkunt...@gmail.com wrote:
> If I am writing in Python, since it is dynamically, but strongly
> typed, I really should check that each parameter is of the expected
> type, or at least can respond to the method I plan on calling ("duck"
> typing). Every call should be wrapped in a try/except stateme
grkunt...@gmail.com wrote:
If I am writing in Python, since it is dynamically, but strongly
typed, I really should check that each parameter is of the expected
type, or at least can respond to the method I plan on calling ("duck"
typing). Every call should be wrapped in a try/except statement to
I am a Java developer. There, I said it :-).
When I am writing code, I can rely on the compiler to confirm that
any methods I write will be called with parameters of the "right"
type. I do not need to test that parameter #1 really is a String
before I call some method on it that only works on Str
13 matches
Mail list logo
