[Python-Dev] my nomination for quote-of-the-week

[Skip Montanaro]

This gets my vote for quote-of-the-week.  Andrew, I seem to recall you are
collecting this sort of stuff.

    From: quinn@yak.ugcs.caltech.edu (Quinn Dunkan)
    To: python-list@python.org
    Subject: Re: not safe at all
    Date: 13 Jul 2001 19:12:51 GMT

    ...

    The static people talk about rigorously enforced interfaces, correctness
    proofs, contracts, etc.  The dynamic people talk about rigorously
    enforced testing and say that types only catch a small portion of
    possible errors.  The static people retort that they don't trust tests
    to cover everything or not have bugs and why write tests for stuff the
    compiler should test for you, so you shouldn't rely on *only* tests, and
    besides static types don't catch a small portion, but a large portion of
    errors.  The dynamic people say no program or test is perfect and static
    typing is not worth the cost in language complexity and design
    difficulty for the gain in eliminating a few tests that would have been
    easy to write anyway, since static types catch a small portion of
    errors, not a large portion.  The static people say static types don't
    add that much language complexity, and it's not design "difficulty" but
    an essential part of the process, and they catch a large portion, not a
    small portion.  The dynamic people say they add enormous complexity, and
    they catch a small portion, and point out that the static people have
    bad breath.  The static people assert that the dynamic people must be
    too stupid to cope with a real language and rigorous requirements, and
    are ugly besides.

    This is when both sides start throwing rocks.

    ...

Skip