3 ms·
If you have impressively low error rates in mind, I think they are coming from "They Write the Right Stuff": > Consider these stats: the last three versions
by rzzzt 1y ago
If you have impressively low error rates in mind, I think they are coming from "They Write the Right Stuff":
> Consider these stats: the last three versions of the program - each
> 420,000 lines long-had just one error each. The last 11 versions of this
> software had a total of 17 errors. Commercial programs of equivalent
> complexity would have 5,000 errors.
- TeMPOraL 1y agoI don't recall that. What I had in mind was this result being used in support of higher-level programming languages; the argument as I remember went, when comparing teams writing the same stuff in multiple languages (IIRC Java, and either Assembly or C, were involved), it was found that the number of bugs per KLOC was about the same in each case, but obviously the number of features implemented in the same number of lines was much greater in high-level, more expressive languages, therefore it's better to use high-level languages. I do buy the general idea (more expressive language -> some class of bugs inexpressible by design + less lines of code for bugs to hide in), but I'm suspicious about the specific result showing a constant bug/KLOC ratio in all tested languages; feels more like a lucky statistical artifact than some deep, fundamental relationship.