On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 10:40, Frans Bouma <[email protected]> wrote: > > gee, then why did I got crashing queries when I ran them, > but > > the > > xml was valid? some magical ball hovering over my office, which > > influenced > > the queries at runtime? > > > > When did I claim otherwise? > > with the remark that tests were sufficient which spurred this > thread > ;) >
No, I claimed that test was enough to do all the "validation" that FNH does (through csc), and a lot more. In other words, that test (which runs in a couple seconds) tests everything that can be tested statically (i.e. based on the code/mapping only, without considering DB mismatches). > > > > Time? It's one click away. Just like the C# compiler. > > > > > > So is a debugger, that doesn't make it the same thing. > > > > The debugger is interactive and requires a lot of time in my part, the > test > > runner, in my view, is just a build step. > > apparently we build software different then. So building the > solution runs all your tests, which will take time, because you need them > because you opt for hand-write XML. You must drink a lot of coffee during > the day! ;) > Nah, I just bought a quad-core with enough RAM. Next step is an SSD. All my non-db tests run in under a minute. Also, I keep myself to only 2 cups of espresso a day. Too much caffeine is bad for you :-D > > > Not only that: in dynamic languages, it's THE ONLY step. > > There's a reason why they code in dynamic languages results in > unmaintainable piles of mud after a while.... > Then I wonder how they keep adding features to Gmail... Diego -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "nhusers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nhusers?hl=en.
