Marshall wrote:
> Bob Badour wrote:
>
>>He fought with his code for days until I pointed out the reversed '+=',
>>and then it took me a half hour to convince him it didn't require a bug
>>in the compiler to treat his code as syntactically correct.
>
> Nice anecdote.
>
> The general principle that I derive from your story is that
> implicit conversions undermine the value of static type
> checking.
Which is also the general principle of Tony D's reply to Pickie's post
about representing booleans as numbers and strings. Is it not?
Received on Thu Jun 01 2006 - 10:00:21 CDT
