From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,21960280f1d61e84 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news2.google.com!news2.google.com!news.germany.com!newsfeed2.scan-plus.net!newsfeed.ision.net!newsfeed2.easynews.net!ision!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool1.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: in defense of GC From: Georg Bauhaus In-Reply-To: <0xzm7puj9c.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de> References: <1169531612.200010.153120@38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1mahvxskejxe1$.tx7bjdqyo2oj$.dlg@40tude.net> <2tfy9vgph3.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de> <1g7m33bys8v4p.6p9cpsh3k031$.dlg@40tude.net> <14hm72xd3b0bq$.axktv523vay8$.dlg@40tude.net> <4zwt33xm4b.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de> <1j7neot6h1udi$.14vp2aos6z9l8.dlg@40tude.net> <1170838486.7656.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1170891160.30084.116.camel@localhost> <0xzm7puj9c.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Organization: # Message-Id: <1171030171.5352.39.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.8.1 Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 15:09:31 +0100 NNTP-Posting-Date: 09 Feb 2007 15:09:13 CET NNTP-Posting-Host: d4306f2a.newsspool2.arcor-online.net X-Trace: DXC=A\BH3YBeYoBXB6NZOJA:ho7QcPOVCPMn;4[GbUhLQEWkH4Hfn8I X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:9193 Date: 2007-02-09T15:09:13+01:00 List-Id: On Thu, 2007-02-08 at 09:49 +0100, Markus E Leypold wrote: > Georg Bauhaus writes: > > > On Wed, 2007-02-07 at 12:19 +0100, Markus E Leypold wrote: > >> Georg Bauhaus writes: > >> > > > >> > If you do this, perhaps you can find the time to use a, uh, stop-watch > >> > to measure the time it takes to produce, read, and change the programs? > >> > I.e., to technically manage significant software. The times will be > >> > important input for deciding whether or not static typing does indeed > >> > help in production. > >> > The only thing that relates to economic efficiency, if you want it :-) > >> > >> So the how long a beginner in a specific language takes to do > >> something is "important input for deciding ..." if compared to what, > >> exactly? > > > > I don't think Ray is a beginner in functional programming. > > >> So the how long a beginner in a specific language takes to do ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > I should think I have been quite clear on that. If your question is asking how much time a beginner will need to start coding productively in either dynamically typed language or statically typed language, then this is a somewhat related question. As for an answer, we have been shown an interesting article about experiences with Ada vs C in teaching model train control. * Equate the expressiveness of Ada base types in source code to explicit and static typing of OCaml on the one hand. * Equate the typical use of int or char* in C to the typical absence of static type expression in Lisp. Then the article shows that explicit static typing helps beginners find a working solution faster. (I know the above equations are not technically correct. But my viewpoint here is on beginning programmers who are mostly guided by what they see written, not by their knowledge of type system effects etc.)