> > > I make those mistakes a lot. Maybe it comes from > having > > a > > > compiler yell at me for them, and having IDEs > underline > > > them, so I'm just sloppy in my typing. > > > > You are going to run that code once, aren't you? > > This takes time. I've had a simple change take me 30 > minutes to make in Python because I had to keep running > the code and find errors. It's much quicker to see the > error instantaneously and fix it.
But you are going to run it afterwards, aren't you?
> > I recently had a bug where one out of every few lines was > being iterated over as a sequence. This took me quite a > while to locate because I had added a faux-object in a > corner case. In a static language, It takes a few moments > to select all the references. I basically stumbled over > this by accident after about an error of looking in the > wrong places for the error. The error turned out to be > that I had declared one of the arguments to a method as > field instead of *fields. In a static language I would > know about this way ahead of time.
Can you elaborate on the error?
> > You are focusing on the quality of the finished product. > The point that I am trying to make is that dynamic > c languages can actually slow down development in the long > term.
Not really. It is your approach that slows it down. The correct approach in dynamic languages is to run the program and correct it while it is running. Interactive development is way much faster than anything else.
Previous Topic
