Comments on: Duck Typing for C# http://www.taylor.se/blog/2006/10/20/duck-typing-for-c/ Smart consulting Tue, 08 Jun 2010 05:02:39 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: Chris Hedgate http://www.taylor.se/blog/2006/10/20/duck-typing-for-c/comment-page-1/#comment-1087 Chris Hedgate Sun, 22 Oct 2006 10:41:52 +0000 http://www.taylor.se/blog/2006/10/20/duck-typing-for-c/#comment-1087 Nick, one of the reasons given for doing it this way was that you wanted to be very agile in your coding. If you are using an interface that is part of the code you are building, and that interface is not completely set, then this method will be a nice alternative to doing it the Visual Studio-way as you say. Otherwise you will need to change your tests (or test helpers or wherever the interface is used) when the interface later changes. If you are really only interested in this one method for a particular test, then I see this method as a nice way. And if I know Andrés correctly, I am pretty sure he is not trying to tell us to do it this way all the time. This is just an example of how you can do things differently for different purposes. Nick, one of the reasons given for doing it this way was that you wanted to be very agile in your coding. If you are using an interface that is part of the code you are building, and that interface is not completely set, then this method will be a nice alternative to doing it the Visual Studio-way as you say. Otherwise you will need to change your tests (or test helpers or wherever the interface is used) when the interface later changes. If you are really only interested in this one method for a particular test, then I see this method as a nice way.

And if I know Andrés correctly, I am pretty sure he is not trying to tell us to do it this way all the time. This is just an example of how you can do things differently for different purposes.

]]> By: Bill Mill http://www.taylor.se/blog/2006/10/20/duck-typing-for-c/comment-page-1/#comment-1059 Bill Mill Sat, 21 Oct 2006 02:55:36 +0000 http://www.taylor.se/blog/2006/10/20/duck-typing-for-c/#comment-1059 Having "grown up" programming in the python community, I always assumed that we invented the term "duck typing". However this was an interesting and informative search: http://groups.google.com/groups/search?q=%22duck+typing%22&start=370&sa=N&scoring=d& . Looks like Rubyists coined the term, but Pythonistas jumped on the bandwagon pretty immediately. Having “grown up” programming in the python community, I always assumed that we invented the term “duck typing”. However this was an interesting and informative search: http://groups.google.com/groups/search?q=%22duck+typing%22&start=370&sa=N&scoring=d& .

Looks like Rubyists coined the term, but Pythonistas jumped on the bandwagon pretty immediately.

]]> By: NIck http://www.taylor.se/blog/2006/10/20/duck-typing-for-c/comment-page-1/#comment-1052 NIck Fri, 20 Oct 2006 16:25:42 +0000 http://www.taylor.se/blog/2006/10/20/duck-typing-for-c/#comment-1052 Why not just do what Visual Studio does by default, and create skeleton implementation of the interface; basically, just a bunch of function prototypes with: throw new Exception("This member has not been implemented yet."); as the only contents of each? That seems a lot more "in theme" with C#, than trying to shove a square peg through a round hole. Why not just do what Visual Studio does by default, and create skeleton implementation of the interface; basically, just a bunch of function prototypes with:

throw new Exception(“This member has not been implemented yet.”);

as the only contents of each?

That seems a lot more “in theme” with C#, than trying to shove a square peg through a round hole.

]]>