For Programmers: Free Programming Magazines  


Home > Archive > Smalltalk > July 2004 > Re: Static vs. Dynamic typing (big advantage or not)









You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread. To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to this thread please [click here]

 

Author Re: Static vs. Dynamic typing (big advantage or not)
Phlip

2004-07-24, 3:56 am

Jim Rogers wrote:

> The individual units were unit tested by their development teams.
> This lead both teams to believe they had correct software.
> Unfortunately, there was insufficient integration testing. Integration
> testing was the only possible way to catch the problem since the
> development language did not provide a useful syntax for defining
> measurement units unambiguously.


Space robot projects operate on shoestring budgets. (Telling the military
that Io harbors terrorists would fix this situation immediately...)

If all the components are hand-made, then bench testing an integrated model
is as expensive as liftoff, minus the rocket.

To the list of potential fixes I add accurate software emulators of hardware
controllers. They could have been cheaply and chronically
integration-tested, between remote development sites. Fewer blind-spots. I
can't imagine something as simple as metric unit conversion mismatch
slipping thru that one.

> Design by contract would not have caught the problem. Values were witin
> expected ranges, they were simply interpreted wrong.


I can think of a contract that...

> Functional programming would not have prevented the problem either.


I can think of a function that...

> Again, unit tests would not have worked.


I can think of a unit test that...

> You seem to be implying that all solutions are equally adequate.


He implied they are equally inadequate. All engineers can hope for is
comparative rates of coverage.

> Of course, the base problem in this case was a failure of requirements
> definition. The requirements document should have specified the units
> of measure to use in the calculations. One of the advantages to
> creating static and strong type definitions is that it forces developers
> to ask some of the unasked questions, such as which units of measure
> to use. In this manner many weaknesses in requirements can be revealed
> and therefore fixed.


Right. Add requirements documents (and EVERYONE READING THEM) to the list of
potential fixes.

Would ISO compliance have helped too? no imperial units...

--
Phlip
http://industrialxp.org/community/b...tUserInterfaces


Sponsored Links







Also available: Server administration forum archive | Web Design forum archive | Software forum archive | Hardware reviews archive

Copyright 2008 codecomments.com