> 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).
Ok. I disagree with you on the value of this above compile time
checking, but let's agree that we disagree on that ;)
> > 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...
Because they generate it from Java
(http://code.google.com/webtoolkit/ )
FB
--
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.
