[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: dynamic vs. static typing
There are the studies by Prechelt and by Gat.
(http://www.flownet.com/gat/papers/lisp-java.pdf) There was also a large
study done at Bell Labs on the most common sources of errors in their
programs, which I recall striking me as being equivalent to a study on
(lack of) programmer productivity. (I can't find the reference right
now, but I have it in my head that I found it through the Erlang community.)
Maybe the behavior of the marketplace demonstrates that the studies are
not, in fact, convincing.
But in any case, with the indirect exception of the Bell Labs study, I
don't recall seeing anything that breaks productivity down by particular
programming area or feature, which I think is a shame. And nothing on
static vs dynamic typing in particular.
Christopher Barber wrote:
> There aren't any convincing empirical studies of any area of programming