Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [extremeperl] Book: Higher Order Perl

Expand Messages
  • Shae Matijs Erisson
    ... I do use software testing in Haskell. QuickCheck is a nifty generative/random testing tool. I hacked up a test-driven-development version of QuickCheck
    Message 1 of 58 , Mar 29, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Rob Nagler <nagler@...> writes:

      > There is always a need to test.  This is why program verification has
      > gotten nowhere.  The fundamental problem is that you can't verify the
      > spec, which, btw, is why you don't write specs in XP (and other agile
      > methodologies).

      I do use software testing in Haskell. QuickCheck is a nifty generative/random
      testing tool. I hacked up a test-driven-development version of QuickCheck too.
      I also use HUnit, but I don't think that single-case unit testing is as
      powerful as generative testing.

      > This doesn't answer my question.  I am speaking in terms of real
      > programs written for real customers who paid real money.  That's all I
      > do.  I don't write code for fun nor do I write trivial programs to
      > test my knowledge of programming.  My goal is to spend every
      > programming minute making money or saving time, because money and time
      > are the only concrete measures of programming efficacy that I know
      > of.

      Oh me me! pick me! I get paid to write Haskell! And I'm self-employed!
      And I choose Haskell because I am convinced I can do a better job for my
      clients with Haskell than I can with other languages I have used.
      I mostly get paid to write Python for Zope/Plone, but I do use Haskell when the
      language of implementation is not important to my clients.
      (Including unit tests for Zope using Haskell's XmlRpc library.)
      --
      Programming is the Magic Executable Fridge Poetry, | www.ScannedInAvian.com
      It is machines made of thought, fueled by ideas. | -- Shae Matijs Erisson
    • Tom Vilot
      ... Wait. That sounds like Rob .... ;c) (kidding) ... Wait. That *also* sounds like Rob ... ... (not kidding!)
      Message 58 of 58 , Apr 8, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Greg C wrote:

        >
        >
        > Consider: projects A and B have identical goals. In project A, you
        > have free
        > rein in your choice of software and hardware tools. However, the
        > manager sets
        > arbitrary deadlines, likes to stand behind people and criticize their
        > code as
        > they type,


        Wait. That sounds like Rob ....
        ;c) (kidding)

        > On project B, the choice of langauge and hardware are made for you and
        > there's
        > only one computer per two programmers. On the other hand, the manager
        > sees his
        > people as people, negotiates requirements and schedules on a realistic
        > basis,
        > trusts his people, follows a set of best practices (be it XP or some
        > other) and
        > chases everyone out of the office at 5:30.


        Wait. That *also* sounds like Rob ...

        :c)

        (not kidding!)
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.