[ruby-talk:00370] Re: type-checking
From:
gotoken@... (GOTO Kentaro)
Date:
1999-06-01 20:51:44 UTC
List:
ruby-talk #370
Hi,
In message "[ruby-talk:00369] Re: type-checking"
on 99/06/01, "Michael Neumann" <neumann@s-direktnet.de> writes:
>I think we don't need type-checking for local variables, because the author
>of the code knows what types the variables have, and I can't imagine that
>Ruby will ever have static-type checking. It is very good without!
Exactly. It is not bad that some library of Racc will be included
in ruby/lib directory.
While local variables should be grasped by the writer, sometimes I
would also prefer more declarative for readers, which include myself
in the future. I've not finished to consider how to make code
declarative, whether it should be solved by coding style without
modifying feature of language, or not.
>Racc is very useful, not only to make coding easier and safer, but also to
>help documenting the code a bit more.
Is this a hint of the below problem?
>It is desirable that the code documents itself, like Eiffel do it. But in
>this aspect Ruby is not yet as far as Eiffel.
Yes, I desire so, but without loss of chance to write as same as
current style -- Everyday I write ugly such that I don't hope to be
read by you :)
-- gotoken
# my shameful errata :-(
# [ruby-talk:00368]
# -Sorry, I had read whole of them. Now I read and think those are nice,
# +Sorry, I had not read whole of them. Now I read and think those are nice,