首页> 外文会议>IEEE/ACM International Conference on Software Engineering >Can We Enforce a Benefit for Dynamically Typed Languages in Comparison to Statically Typed Ones? A Controlled Experiment
【24h】

Can We Enforce a Benefit for Dynamically Typed Languages in Comparison to Statically Typed Ones? A Controlled Experiment

机译:与静态键入的,我们可以为动态类型的语言强制执行福利吗?一个受控实验

获取原文

摘要

There are a number of experiments that show a benefit for statically typed programming languages. However, it is unclear whether these results are mainly driven by the expectations that developers do benefit from static type systems, i.e. whether the results reflect on the experimenters' bias. From that perspective, it seems consequent to design an experiment that tries to reveals the opposite: to enforce a benefit for dynamically typed languages. This paper describes an experiment that tries to enforce such a benefit for dynamically typed languages in an experimental setting. Four (quite artificial) tasks were designed from which the experimenters expected to measure a clear benefit for dynamically typed languages. However, only in two cases such a benefit could be measured. What is even more interesting is that two other tasks (again, explicitly designed to show a benefit for dynamically typed languages) showed the opposite.
机译:有许多实验显示静态类型的编程语言的好处。然而,目前尚不清楚这些结果是主要推动的,这些结果是开发人员从静态系统中受益的期望,即结果是否反映了实验者的偏见。从那个角度来看,它似乎是设计一个尝试揭示相反的实验:强制为动态类型的语言实施福利。本文介绍了一个实验,以实验环境中试图强制执行这种动态类型的语言。四项(相当的人工)任务是设计从中预期的实验者来衡量动态类型语言的明确效益。但是,只有在两种情况下可以测量这样的效益。更有趣的是,另外两个任务(再次明确旨在为动态类型的语言显示好处)表现出相反的。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号