From: Robert Dober <robert.dober@...>
Date: 2006-12-31T18:28:06+09:00
Subject: Re: Strong encapsulation, static typing and unit testing

------=_Part_117411_27612846.1167557283909
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

On 12/30/06, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky <znmeb@cesmail.net> wrote:
>
> Robert Dober wrote:
> > On 12/30/06, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky <znmeb@cesmail.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> Nick Pavey wrote:
> >> <snip>
> >> Well ... this discussion comes up often enough on this list that most
> >> peoples' opinions are well known,
> >
> >
> ><snip>


Nice reading  but I guess we are getting off topic

> Could you elaborate?  Would that pragmatical approach not allow to
> > implement  using *your* technique? Please note I am out off business
> > since
> > 89, have to earn my bread with IP/DB/OS (baaad!)
> Well ... I can elaborate at great length, but I suspect I'd simply be
> repeating what other people have said and said more eloquently. This
> particular discussion is centered on language features and software
> engineering practices, and the original poster was very explicit about
> at least the business *context* of his post, if not the actual business
> model. In short, what works for him might not work for someone building,
> say, a social web site, an algorithmic composition package or a queuing
> theory model.


What I meant is the following,  Is it possible to hide the choice of the
implementation language from the customer, can an abstraction be made to
"get the job done".
But this still might be OT, do not mind too much about it.

Thx for your thaughts Ed
and Happy New Year to all :)

Cheers
Robert

--
>
>
>


-- 
"The real romance is out ahead and yet to come. The computer revolution
hasn't started yet. Don't be misled by the enormous flow of money into bad
defacto standards for unsophisticated buyers using poor adaptations of
incomplete ideas."

- Alan Kay

------=_Part_117411_27612846.1167557283909--