Movatterモバイル変換

Class Variable Question

• Previous message (by thread):Class Variable Question
• Next message (by thread):Class Variable Question
• Messages sorted by:[ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

"Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk" <qrczak at knm.org.pl> wrote in messagenews:slrn9diqh0.lut.qrczak at qrnik.zagroda...    [snip]> > Your C++ compiler doesn't catch all the typos you can make where you> > type '+' while meaning to type '-', or '>' intending '<', etc, for> > example.>> Of course. No language catches such typos.>> It doesn't imply that catching detectable typos (e.g. using names> which are not defined) is worthless!No, it just puts that worth in perspective.  It's worth _something_,sure -- but not very much.> I'm seeing again this poor argument: some mechanism doesn't solve> all problems, so it's worse than having nothing...If there was *NO* price to be paid for the 'mechanism', that wouldbe a poor argument indeed.  Since, in this case, there *would* bea substantial price to pay to catch this specific subset of typos, itbecomes very important to put the gain in perspective, rather thanidolize this typo-catching as something precious and worth payinga lot for just because some languages perform it.  As you note inthe snipped part, lint-like approaches, for example, can catch suchtypos WITHOUT requiring alterations to the Python language.  Likethe previously separate function of tabnanny was eventually put inthe Python interpreter with the -t option, so can others (indeed, itwould not be hard to modify interpreter sources to give a generalescape mechanism for such checking).  Proposing to mutilate thelanguage's power instead of making tools better is inane.Alex

• Previous message (by thread):Class Variable Question
• Next message (by thread):Class Variable Question
• Messages sorted by:[ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]