Related articles |
---|
[35 earlier articles] |
Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?" jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr (jacob navia) (2002-11-26) |
Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?" jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr (jacob navia) (2002-11-26) |
Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?" jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr (jacob navia) (2002-11-26) |
Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?" david.thompson1@worldnet.att.net (David Thompson) (2002-11-26) |
Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?" ajo@andrew.cmu.edu (Arthur J. O'Dwyer) (2002-11-26) |
Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?" thp@cs.ucr.edu (2002-11-26) |
Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?" thp@cs.ucr.edu (2002-11-26) |
Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?" Nicola.Musatti@ObjectWay.it (Nicola Musatti) (2002-11-26) |
Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?" nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (Nick Maclaren) (2002-11-26) |
Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?" peter_flass@yahoo.com (Peter Flass) (2002-11-26) |
Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?" fjh@students.cs.mu.OZ.AU (Fergus Henderson) (2002-11-26) |
Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?" daniel_yokomiso@softhome.net (Daniel Yokomiso) (2002-11-26) |
Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?" thp@cs.ucr.edu (2002-11-26) |
[25 later articles] |
From: | thp@cs.ucr.edu |
Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
Date: | 26 Nov 2002 22:06:40 -0500 |
Organization: | University of California, Riverside |
References: | 02-11-059 02-11-087 02-11-089 02-11-111 02-11-126 02-11-149 |
Keywords: | types, practice |
Posted-Date: | 26 Nov 2002 22:06:40 EST |
Joachim Durchholz <joachim_d@gmx.de> wrote:
+ + [I don't see a useful difference between a system that requires that you
+ + declare everything, vs. one that doesn't but produces undeclared variable
+ + warnings that the programmer treats like error messages. -John]
+
+ thp@cs.ucr.edu wrote:
+> Some of my students are Pythonistas. They insist that the lack of
+> such assistance from the compiler in detecting typos has never been an
+> issue. (I wouldn't know.)
+
+ Do these students have *serious* programming experience? Are their
+ programs large enough that long variable/function/module names make
+ sense? If the answer to either question is "no", I'd consider their
+ experience to be unrelated to everyday practice ;-)
Some of them are ex-students with a great deal of experience. I
consider their judgements relevant but not decisive or completely
convincing. ;-)
Tom Payne
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.