On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 4:27 AM, Rick DeNatale <rick.denatale / gmail.com> wrote:
<snip>
>  >  True. But nothing guarantees you anything at run-time, including 100%
>  > compliance at compile-time. That's why most CS and IS degrees have lectures
>  > explaining the difference between Verification (what your compiler does) and
>  > Validation (what you do before you start coding).
>
>  Amen, Sister!  And languages which rely on static typing have a
>  tendency to do much more random things when things go wrong.  Language
>  like Ruby tend to have a more vigilant runtime.

Reminds me of the old story about Donald Knuth (I do not know if it is
actually true) who was lecturing formal code proves and was asked by a
student if the code actually worked now. He replied:
I do not have any idea I only proved it correct I never tested it.
Although most of you know this story I believe that it is particularly
of interest in this context.

Cheers
Robert

-- 
http://ruby-smalltalk.blogspot.com/

---
Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent.
Ludwig Wittgenstein