STRONG dynamic typing favors tools..?

ruby-talk
1

One of the things I like about languages like Java is that since it is
statically typed I get tools that assist me when I write code, for
example if I misspell a function name.

What I really hate about dynamic languages is that, for example in
JavaScript if I misspell something there is no tool to find it and no
(deterministic) test locate this bug. I could actually deploy and find
the mispelled name only when I get its use case.

Does the fact that Ruby is STRONG dynaically typed, assist tool
developers? Can I have tools with minimal analysis capabilities?

2

John Papas wrote:

One of the things I like about languages like Java is that since it is
statically typed I get tools that assist me when I write code, for
example if I misspell a function name.

What I really hate about dynamic languages is that, for example in
JavaScript if I misspell something there is no tool to find it and no
(deterministic) test locate this bug. I could actually deploy and find
the mispelled name only when I get its use case.

Does the fact that Ruby is STRONG dynaically typed, assist tool
developers? Can I have tools with minimal analysis capabilities?

NetBeans warns you about many of the "usual" cases of misspelling and coding errors in Ruby. (Be aware that all types of checks are not enabled out of the box. Look at the tutorials to get a feeling of what's available.) There seems to be other editors around with intelligent code parsing as well.

Best regards,

Jari Williamsson

3

John Papas:

What I really hate about dynamic languages is that, for example in
JavaScript if I misspell something there is no tool to find it and
no (deterministic) test locate this bug.

The idea behind unit testing is that they catch such things for you.
Better yet, Test- (or Behaviour-) Driven Development means your code
does what it’s asked to do, so it doesn’t really matter if there are
any misspellings inside or not.

-- Shot

···

--
If I have not seen as far as others, it is because
giants were standing on my shoulders. -- Hal Abelson

4

John Papas wrote:

One of the things I like about languages like Java is that since it is
statically typed I get tools that assist me when I write code, for
example if I misspell a function name.

This doesn't actually have anything to do with Java being statically
typed.

What I really hate about dynamic languages is that, for example in
JavaScript if I misspell something there is no tool to find it [...]

Again, this doesn't actually have anything to do with the dynamic
nature of those languages.

In fact, pretty much all of the features that are now associated with
IDEs for static languages, were invented in Smalltalk IDEs: code
completion, class browsers, automated refactoring tools, automated
unit testing.

The *only* reason for the differences between IDEs for static and
dynamic languages is money: the Eclipse Java Development Tools are
developed by dozens of highly paid full-time engineers with million
dollar research budgets by IBM, Oracle, BEA etc.

The Eclipse Ruby Development Tools were developed by a couple of
hobbyists in their spare time, without getting paid, with no research
budget at all, and even without knowing Eclipse programming.

Does the fact that Ruby is STRONG dynaically typed, assist tool
developers? Can I have tools with minimal analysis capabilities?

Pretty much all current Ruby IDEs (RDT, DLTK, 3rd Rail, NetBeans, Ruby
in Steel) have code completion, type inference, automated refactoring
tools and a lot of the things you would expect from a modern IDE. But,
again, this doesn't have anything to do with Ruby being "strongly
typed", it has to do with Ruby being high on the hype curve and
companies like Sun, CodeGear, Sapphire Steel and Aptana investing
money in Ruby IDEs.

jwm

5

Ruby In Steel Developer analyzes code as it is written to provide
correct code completion (IntelliSense). You can also add optional 'type
assertions' in comment blocks to provide extra typing information for
parameter completion. More info here:

http://www.sapphiresteel.com/Ruby-In-Steel-Developer-Overview

best wishes
Huw

SapphireSteel Software
Ruby and Rails In Visual Studio
http://www.sapphiresteel.com

···

--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

6

it's a bit tangental, but you really shouldn't be spelling anything if you are comfortable with your editor - at least not more than once. for instance, in vim, after i say something like

   foobar = 42

i would just type

   fo <ctrl-N> and the foobar var is auto completed in much the same way as the shell auto completes.

it's extremely rare that i would actually spell out any var longer than two chars. using this technique i find that i rarely, perhaps once per month, make a spelling error that causes me an issue.

regards.

···

On Jan 7, 2008, at 10:03 AM, Shot (Piotr Szotkowski) wrote:

What I really hate about dynamic languages is that, for example in
JavaScript if I misspell something there is no tool to find it and
no (deterministic) test locate this bug.

7

Shot (Piotr Szotkowski) wrote:

John Papas:

What I really hate about dynamic languages is that, for example in
JavaScript if I misspell something there is no tool to find it and
no (deterministic) test locate this bug.

The idea behind unit testing is that they catch such things for you.
Better yet, Test- (or Behaviour-) Driven Development means your code
does what it’s asked to do, so it doesn’t really matter if there are
any misspellings inside or not.

Ah, but then there's "heckle". Heckle inserts random bugs in your code,
and if your tests don't catch them, then the tests aren't sufficient. :slight_smile: