[lug] Development & reporting tool choices

[Sean Reifschneider]

Steve Sullivan wrote:
> While an interpreted language is great for rapid development (I'm
> a python fan myself), there is one big drawback: no static type
> checking.  And that means when your code runs into any unusual
> condition that you didn't test after your last mod, it can easily
> die ... in the customer's lap.

Obviously, having a static type checking doesn't prevent modifications from
causing the code to die...  In either case you really want to have a
testing system that you can run after making changes.

Sean
-- 
Sean Reifschneider, Member of Technical Staff <jafo at tummy.com>
tummy.com, ltd. - Linux Consulting since 1995: Ask me about High Availability

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 251 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.lug.boulder.co.us/pipermail/lug/attachments/20090210/8e44b2cb/attachment.pgp>