strong typing is not a panaceum, and, anyway...

[Jerzy Karczmarczuk]

Brian Boutel to Sergey Mechveliani:

> > There is no scientific reason why  all  computations with types and
> > type resolution should preceed all computations with non-types.

> No scientific reason, but a strong engineering reason.
> 
> The engineering idea is to test a design with all available tools before
> building it. That way there will be no disasters that could have been
> forseen. The computing equivalent of an engineering disaster is for a
> program to get a run-time error or to produce an incorrect result. If
> this outcome is acceptable, then the program probably wasn't important
> enough to be worth writing in the first place.

If an entity is sufficiently complex, there will be always a margin of
error. Good if avoidable, but...

Would you apply the same philosophy of "non-importance" of a possibly bugged
result, to procreating children?...

Jerzy Karczmarczuk
Caen, France