3 ms·
>I also dispute the claim that a strong type system is a "tiny factor" in code quality. There actually are some studies that show that using a static typing sy
by liviu- 12y ago
>I also dispute the claim that a strong type system is a "tiny factor" in code quality.
There actually are some studies that show that using a static typing system is only a tiny factor when it comes to code quality:
http://wadler.blogspot.co.uk/2011/09/experiment-about-static-and-dynamic.html http://wadler.blogspot.co.uk/2011/09/experiment-about-static...
However, I've also read studies that show the opposite, but the lack of rigurosity and the possible confounds that show up for both sides seems to render this as an open question.
- calibraxis 12y agoWith Clojure, you can begin to compare static vs. dynamic typing — keeping the language the same.
- Glide 12y agoA language having static or dynamic typing is only a part of the puzzle. Having tools that let you understand a codebase better through static typing is more important. With a statically typed language you have the compiler as a baseline, but it enables IDEs to do far more powerful things.
- mercurial 12y ago> However, I've also read studies that show the opposite, but the lack of rigurosity and the possible confounds that show up for both sides seems to render this as an open question. This doesn't look particularly convincing, indeed (though studies about programming languages rarely are).