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 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-04-29 13:15:38 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!newsfeeds.belnet.be!newsfeed.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!newsfeed.vmunix.org!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!news5-gui.server.ntli.net!ntli.net!news8-gui.server.ntli.net.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: RE: Is strong typing worth the cost? From: dmjones References: Organization: Knowledge Software Message-ID: User-Agent: Xnews/L5 Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 20:15:36 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 62.252.22.178 X-Complaints-To: abuse@ntlworld.com X-Trace: news8-gui.server.ntli.net 1020111336 62.252.22.178 (Mon, 29 Apr 2002 21:15:36 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 21:15:36 BST Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:23234 Date: 2002-04-29T20:15:36+00:00 List-Id: Pat, Darren, I appreciate there is more to strong typing than subtypes of integers. But including structured types brings in all sorts of bagage. If I were doing such an experiment I would keep it simple. Besides, many languages are a bit stronger in their typing of array and structured types, than of their integer types. Frank, > Because then they will have to program in all the necessary > checking to prevent erroneous results. The group that uses Not necessarily. If I know a particular quantity will vary between 1..5 I will define such a type. I know that I then get this 1..5 assumption checked for me, which is useful. But would I go to the effort of putting all those 1..5 checks in by hand? I doubt it. > How are you going to determine that the unprotected group > programmed all the necessary checking? Are you going to > have some type of code analysis software to check it out? > This will have a huge impact on downstream maintenance. Can back this statement up with some evidence? At the moment I will settle for any references to studies showing that use of strong typing (not structured types) has a cost/benefit ratio of less than one.