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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,d89b08801f2aacae,start X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-04-28 10:07:23 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!kibo.news.demon.net!demon!peernews!peer.cwci.net!news5-gui.server.ntli.net!ntli.net!news6-win.server.ntlworld.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Is strong typing worth the cost? From: dmjones Organization: Knowledge Software Message-ID: Followup-To: comp.lang.pascal.misc User-Agent: Xnews/L5 Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2002 17:07:22 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 62.252.22.178 X-Complaints-To: abuse@ntlworld.com X-Trace: news6-win.server.ntlworld.com 1020013642 62.252.22.178 (Sun, 28 Apr 2002 18:07:22 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2002 18:07:22 BST Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:23197 Date: 2002-04-28T17:07:22+00:00 List-Id: All, I have been trying to locate evidence that the cost of the use of strong typing is repaid by a greater benefit. Now we all know, from first hand experience, the benefits of strong type checking. But where is the experimental proof? I know of two studies: A Controlled experiment to assess the benefits of procedure argument type checking, by Prechelt & Tichy, IEEE Trans on Software Engineering Vol 24, no 4. 302-312. An Experimental evaluation of data type conventions, by Gannon, CACM Vol 20, no 8. 584-595. Both studies used student subjects, not the one most likely to have had lots of experience structuring a program using types. One study also used C, which is strongly typed if compared to assembler. So where are the studies showing that strong typing in Ada (or Pascal) saves money/time, creates more reliable programs, etc? References anybody?