RE: Python vs. C#

Discussion in 'Python' started by Brian Quinlan, Aug 13, 2003.

  1. > Compiler checking is a kind of test that is done for you all the time,
    > without you having to reimplement it over and over again.


    The design of the .NET framework minimizes the utility of static type
    checking by using the object class all over the place. When you wish to
    use an instance of class object you must cast it into an appropriate
    type. The validity of the cast is determined at runtime. Almost all of
    the collection classes, for example, deal in "object"s.

    > I agree that people should write tests, but having written many, many
    > of those for my own project, it is equally true that writing test
    > cases slows down development.


    I think that depends on how efficient you are at writing tests. Python
    offers a great testing framework to help you.

    > Anything that provides testing "for free" is a boon.


    It is not free. You are accepting several limitations (e.g. object must
    conform to a particular interface to be useable, all types must be
    specified) to get a type of checking that is of questionable value.

    > Big projects are filled with the bell curve. Not to mention stress

    under
    > deadlines, which ruins the code of even good programmers.


    Cheers,
    Brian
    Brian Quinlan, Aug 13, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. I'm done with c.l.p for now, I've moved on to the marketing-python list.
    This has been an interesting proving ground, and I've gotten the information
    I came for, but productivity demands a move to a different venue. This post
    was CC:'d to me so I want to address one point:

    Brian Quinlan wrote:
    > Brandon wrote:
    >>
    >> I agree that people should write tests, but having written many, many
    >> of those for my own project, it is equally true that writing test
    >> cases slows down development.

    >
    > I think that depends on how efficient you are at writing tests. Python
    > offers a great testing framework to help you.


    No, writing tests consumes time. I measure my productivity in units of 4
    hours, i.e. a half day. My worst bugs last me 2 days. There is no language
    written that will obviate the need to design a valid test case. Writing
    test cases is simply a slow process when you measure functional results over
    such small periods of time. I am 1 guy and don't have the luxury of armies
    of coders in an industrial environment to work with. I'm very efficient,
    and I know what fast and slow is. I do the tests when I know robustness is
    going to save engineering time. I avoid them for their own sake, it is a
    waste of time. Better to simply get working code exercised, and keep it all
    down to 1 code path so that everything continues to be exercised.

    >> Anything that provides testing "for free" is a boon.

    >
    > It is not free. You are accepting several limitations (e.g. object
    > must conform to a particular interface to be useable, all types must
    > be specified) to get a type of checking that is of questionable value.


    C++ style compiler checking helps. I've never met anyone who thinks
    otherwise. Pythonistas just habitually claim it doesn't have merit and
    complain about burdens imposed. To us C++ guys, it is no big deal. It is,
    frankly, the least of our troubles under C++.

    --
    Cheers, www.3DProgrammer.com
    Brandon Van Every Seattle, WA

    20% of the world is real.
    80% is gobbledygook we make up inside our own heads.
    Brandon J. Van Every, Aug 13, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    743
  2. Paul Moore
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    613
    Paul Moore
    Mar 1, 2008
  3. Martin v. Löwis
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    652
    Martin v. Löwis
    Mar 1, 2008
  4. Senthil Kumaran
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    572
    Senthil Kumaran
    Jan 17, 2011
  5. R. David Murray
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    752
    R. David Murray
    Jan 17, 2011
Loading...

Share This Page