[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: dynamic vs. static typing

To: Pascal Costanza <address@hidden>
Subject: Re: dynamic vs. static typing
From: Christopher Barber <address@hidden>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 16:53:40 -0500
Cc: Doug Landauer <address@hidden>, address@hidden
In-reply-to: <653910D2-1F8D-11D8-87F3-000A95DB189E@web.de>
References: <D7AED6C2-1F74-11D8-A2FC-003065E43436@got.net> <653910D2-1F8D-11D8-87F3-000A95DB189E@web.de>
Sender: address@hidden
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624

Pascal Costanza wrote:

>
> On 25 Nov 2003, at 19:26, Doug Landauer wrote:
>
>>
>> On Monday, Nov 24, 2003, at 13:16 US/Pacific, Paul F. Dietz wrote:
>>
>>> ... is there any evidence to support the contention that the putative
>>> savings in debugging time exceeds the extra design and coding cost?
>>
>>
>> Is there any evidence of "extra design and coding cost"?
>
>
> Is there any evidence that empirical studies have been carried out in 
> that area?

There aren't any convincing empirical studies of any area of programming 
productivity.

- Christopher

Follow-Ups:
- Re: dynamic vs. static typing
  - From: Howard Stearns <stearns@alum.mit.edu>

References:
- Re: dynamic vs. static typing
  - From: Doug Landauer <landauer@got.net>
- Re: dynamic vs. static typing
  - From: Pascal Costanza <costanza@web.de>

Prev by Date: Re: measuring dynamic vs. static typing effectiveness
Next by Date: Re: dynamic vs. static typing
Previous by thread: Re: dynamic vs. static typing
Next by thread: Re: dynamic vs. static typing
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread