4 ms·
Right, so doesn't that example go back to my original assertion that error rates differ between languages in reasonably intuitive ways?
by gdp 17y ago
Right, so doesn't that example go back to my original assertion that error rates differ between languages in reasonably intuitive ways?
- scott_s 17y agoI think we're using different reference points. I'm assuming that in a fixed amount of program text, the number of bugs across all languages is relatively constant. More text means more concepts and more opportunities to be wrong. I think your point is that for a given problem, different programming languages will yield solutions with variable number of bugs. In a language that is simpler to express the solution, it's more likely to be correct. These two points are compatible. I'm fixing the amount of program text, you're fixing the problem.
- gdp 17y agoFrom Withrow (1990), on ADA: Module LoC | Error Rate per 1k LoC 63 | 1.5 100 | 1.4 158 | 0.9 251 | 0.5 398 | 1.1 630 | 1.9 1000 | 1.3 >1000 | 1.4 This appears to show no such linear relationship between error rate and LoC within a single language, with a fixed amount of program text. This report appears to suggest an observed average error rate of 18 defects per 1000 lines of code: http://www.lanl.gov/projects/CartaBlanca/webdocs/PhippsPaperOnJavaEfficiency.pdf http://www.lanl.gov/projects/CartaBlanca/webdocs/PhippsPaper... and the same programmer generated an average of 6 defects per 1000 lines of code in Java. This is just a random sampling of error rates I could find quickly with a google search and a paper I already had on my desk, however the fact that three samples from three projects (two of which were from the same programmer) suggests that there is likely to be variation both in terms of the (fixed) amount of program text, and the problem between languages.