On 2003-03-13T19:48:59-0500, Alan Bawden wrote: > It's clear that this is a possibility, but I don't recall any cases from my > own experience where the system inferred a more general type than I had in > mind, and where this was a symptom of a bug rather than merely being > unanticipated generality. I'd be interested in seeing a really compelling > example. (Note that I'm not disagreeing with anybody here -- I'm just > saying that I think a good example of this would be interesting to look > at.) Unfortunately, I forget the specific examples. Mostly it has to do with forgetting to use an argument (often after copying and pasting code)... Sometimes I would write "x1 == x2 && x1 == x2" rather than "x1 == x2 && y1 == y2", or even just "x1 == x2". I'll watch out for these examples in the future. -- Edit this signature at http://www.digitas.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/ken/sig Sign the emergency petition to the U.N. Security Council: http://www.moveon.org/emergency/
Attachment:
pgp19008.pgp
Description: PGP signature