Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!apple!lins
From: lins@Apple.COM (Chuck Lins)
Newsgroups: comp.object
Subject: Re: Do we really need types in OOPL's?
Summary: It helps.
Message-ID: <45940@apple.Apple.COM>
Date: 24 Oct 90 16:14:02 GMT
References: <1990Oct9.190813.23402@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> <2444@runxtsa.runx.oz.au> <1990Oct19.180646.8649@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA
Lines: 17

In article <1990Oct19.180646.8649@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> render@cs.uiuc.edu (Hal Render) writes:
>Assuming that any software you write is thoroughly tested, most 
>type errors that would be caught at compilation can be caught during
>testing.  

First, "most" is not the same as "all". Second, you may be forgetting the
relative costs here. A compilation of a few seconds (or even minutes) costs
far far less than the hours or days it takes to thoroughly test software. We
are talking orders of magnitude here.

-- 
Chuck Lins               | "Is this the kind of work you'd like to do?"
Apple Computer, Inc.     | -- Front 242
20525 Mariani Avenue     | Internet:  lins@apple.com
Mail Stop 37-BD          | AppleLink: LINS@applelink.apple.com
Cupertino, CA 95014      | "Self-proclaimed Object Oberon Evangelist"
The intersection of Apple's ideas and my ideas yields the empty set.