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: 2002-05-02 19:45:57 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!cox.net!newspeer1-gui.server.ntli.net!ntli.net!news6-win.server.ntlworld.com.POSTED!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: Fri, 03 May 2002 02:45:56 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 62.252.22.178 X-Complaints-To: abuse@ntlworld.com X-Trace: news6-win.server.ntlworld.com 1020393956 62.252.22.178 (Fri, 03 May 2002 03:45:56 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 03:45:56 BST Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:23467 Date: 2002-05-03T02:45:56+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. I have been following up on the references posted here (thanks all). Figure 4 of "Impact of Ada and object-oriented design in the flight dynamics division of Goddard Space Flight Center", SEL-95-001 shows a graph of "total types per statement" vs time (a five year period). The increase is claimed to be due to an increase in use of strong typing. The cited reference is: "Experiments in software engineering technology" by McGarry & Waligora. From SEL-91-006. This paper does not appear to be available online. Does anybody have a copy? How is "total types per statement" measured? Is it an average of the number of types appearing in the same statement?