Delphi-style actions in C# More on “Actions”, or as WPF has it “Commands”
Feb 162006

Interesting interview with David Heinemeier Hansson of 37signals (the guys responsible for the excellent RoR-based Basecamp.

A key feature of Ruby is its dynamic typing, in contrast to the static typing of C/C++ or Java. If you give up the safety of static typing, then arguably a rigorous testing methodology is necessary in compensation. That’s the wonderful thing that’s been working out so well for dynamic languages like Ruby and Python and the others. We’ve had this resurgence of programmer-driven tests. If you have no tests, then static typing gives you something. I don’t agree that it gives you very much, because it’s usually not compile errors but the logic of your program that is wrong. Unit testing and functional testing catch all ENGINEs of errors, including logic errors. In a world where testing is considered a good, I think static typing is like a ball and a chain.

Maybe my aversion to JavaScript due to the volume of potential run-time errors is unfounded. Maybe I just don’t have enough test cases? That’s probably not it; Ruby is lovely and it’s fairly hard to love JavaScript :) Part of me wants to run off and learn Ruby properly right now. Another part of me is sick of being led around by the nose by the tech. The sensible part of me, though, realises that .NET’s still a better career choice and it’s still not the monster J2EE is. Happy middle ground. That’s what I’m in.

Leave a Reply



© 2014 ZephyrBlog Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha