Alan Lovejoy wrote:
> Andreas: "Of course, the promoters of TDD would claim that if there isn't a
> test covering it, the code might as well not exist ;-)"
> 
> Ya know, that sentiment reminds me way too much of the arguments made by the
> static typing priesthood. At the very least, it's a dogmatic overstatement
> of the case.

Which -I thought- the smiley at the end made clear. Sorry to see it 
doesn't. Yes, of course, that was a dogmatic overstatement, it was meant 
to be. But there is a grain of truth that's worthwhile to discuss - 
namely that, if anything, tests should be used as "a" primary source for 
imprinting (I'm putting the "a source" in quotes to point out that I 
don't mean it to be the sole source just in case someone else is 
inclined to interpret this as another dogmatic overstatement which in 
that case it's not supposed to be ;-) <-- and please notice smiley here; 
this wasn't supposed to be taken too seriously ;-) <-- etc.

Cheers,
   - Andreas