Re: Is strong typing worth the cost?

[jimmaureenrogers@worldnet.att.net (Jim Rogers)]

dmjones <derek@NOSPAMknosof.co.uk> wrote in message news:<Xns9201C885373ADderekknosofcouk@194.168.222.64>...
> >> Jim Rogers:  What are the parameters of cost?
> >> 
> Strong typing requires me to pay more attention to 100% of the
> source I write.  By pay attention I mean I have to get it through
> the compiler (the compiler will pick me up on type errors that I will
> have to invest time in fixing).  Using a weakly typed language does
> not require me to invest so much time up front.
> 
> Usage of my program, by customers, will not result in all
> statements being executed.  Say 70-80% are not executed (I can dig up
> some papers on this).
> 
> Knowing this my management has instituted an 'only test what the
> initial customers are likely to use' policy (of course if they really
> knew what they were doing they would have an 'only write what the
> customer is likely to use' policy, but we are in a hurry to get things
> out the door and once written any code is kept).

I would be very uncomfortable working in an environment where 70-80% of
my code was unwanted and unused by customers. It appears that your
company suffers from a poor requirements definition process. Clearly,
you will get the greatest benefit from designing and coding only the
features actually used by your customers. 

Nothing is free, however. Determining your actual customer needs costs
time and money. On the other hand, not knowing what your customer wants
and needs is apparently costing you 70-80% of your development budget.

There is nothing that a choice of languages could do to improve your
software development expenses as much as simply determining what your
actual requirements are. This will then allow you to think about 100%
of your code. At that point you can also be concerned with the "trivial"
points of quality and reliability.

Jim Rogers