May 26, 2009 at 8:43 PM
I'm glad you're doing videos of these, but I'm disappointed by the quality of the video. It's very difficult to read.
Also, I get an exception when following along. I'm doing so in a Silverlight Business Application project. I created a ContentControl with the RegionManager.RegionName attached property value of 'TestRegion'.
An exception occurred while creating a region with name 'TestRegion'. The exception was: System.Collections.Generic.KeyNotFoundException: controlType
at Microsoft.Practices.Composite.Presentation.Regions.RegionAdapterMappings.GetMapping(Type controlType)
at Microsoft.Practices.Composite.Presentation.Regions.Behaviors.DelayedRegionCreationBehavior.CreateRegion(DependencyObject targetElement, String regionName).
Any ideas what might be happening?
Apr 28, 2009 at 10:21 PMThere's a difference between actual reliability and provable reliability. Gilad merely asserts that the actual reliability of programs written in dynamically-typed languages are equal to statically-typed languages. Not sure whether that's true or not, but that distinction matters.
Gilad is right (and Anders admits) that dynamic typing allows greater flexibility and power (at a cost). But I think Gilad lacks appreciation for the advantages that static typing provides. Yes, it's harder to make static-type languages perform tricks like pervasive type inference, and it's harder to implement metaprogramming, and this is due to the additional design constraints of proving reliability and safety. But with every constraint, every proof of logical correctness, you get some advantage... like better performance.