Spoon progress 15 April 2005: inert method deletion details and next steps

Chris Muller chris at funkyobjects.org
Mon Apr 17 20:38:44 UTC 2006


Although Alan didn't have an explicit smiley face, I took it as wry humor, not to mention an enlightening allusion.  It made me smile anyway..  Love this list!

----- Original Message ----
From: Andreas Raab <andreas.raab at gmx.de>
To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list <squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
Sent: Sunday, April 16, 2006 6:36:10 PM
Subject: Re: Spoon progress 15 April 2005: inert method deletion details and next steps

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








More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list