Do static type systems improve the maintainability of software systems? An empirical study

IEEE International Conference on Program Comprehension

Volumn , Issue , 2012, Pages 153-162

  Kleinschmager, Sebastian ^a   Hanenberg, Stefan ^a   Robbes, Romain ^b   Tanter, Éric ^b   Stefik, Andreas ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF DUISBURG ESSEN   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CHILE   (Chile)

^c SOUTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY EDWARDSVILLE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

MAINTAINABILITY; OBJECT ORIENTED PROGRAMMING; SEMANTICS; SOFTWARE DESIGN;

EMPIRICAL STUDIES; SEMANTIC ERRORS; SOFTWARE SYSTEMS; STATIC TYPE SYSTEMS;

SOFTWARE TESTING;

EID: 84864986448     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1109/icpc.2012.6240483     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (23)

1. Richard Bird and Philip Wadler. An introduction to functional programming. Prentice Hall International (UK) Ltd., Hertfordshire, UK, UK, 1988.
2. Kim B. Bruce. Foundations of object-oriented languages: types and semantics. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA, 2002.
3. Oscar Callaú, Romain Robbes, Éric Tanter, and David Röthlisberger. How developers use the dynamic features of programming languages: the case of smalltalk. In Proceedings of the 8th International Working Conference on Mining Software Repositories, MSR 2011 (Co-located with ICSE), Waikiki, Honolulu, HI, USA, May 21-28, 2011, Proceedings, pages 23-32, 2011.
4. Luca Cardelli. Type systems. In Allen B. Tucker, editor, The Computer Science and Engineering Handbook, chapter 103, pages 2208-2236. CRC Press, 1997.
5. Mark T. Daly, Vibha Sazawal, and Jeffrey S. Foster. Work in progress: an empirical study of static typing in ruby. Workshop on Evaluation and Usability of Programming Languages and Tools (PLATEAU),Orlando, Florida, October 2009, 2009.
6. Stefan Endrikat and Stefan Hanenberg. Is aspect-oriented programming a rewarding investment into future code changes? a socio-technical study on development and maintenance time. In The 19th IEEE International Conference on Program Comprehension, ICPC 2011, Kingston, ON, Canada, June 22-24, 2011, pages 51-60, 2011.
7. J. D. Gannon. An experimental evaluation of data type conventions. Commun. ACM, 20(8):584-595, 1977.
8. Stefan Hanenberg. An experiment about static and dynamic type systems: Doubts about the positive impact of static type systems on development time. In Proceedings of the ACM international conference on Object oriented programming systems languages and applications, OOPSLA '10, pages 22-35, New York, NY, USA, 2010. ACM.
9. Stefan Hanenberg. A chronological experience report from an initial experiment series on static type systems. In 2nd Workshop on Empirical Evaluation of Software Composition Techniques (ESCOT), Lancaster, UK, 2011.
10. Stefan Hanenberg, Sebastian Kleinschmager, and Manuel Josupeit-Walter. Does aspect-oriented programming increase the development speed for crosscutting code? An empirical study. In Proceedings of the 2009 3rd International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement, ESEM '09, pages 156-167, Lake Buena Vista, Florida, USA, 2009. IEEE Computer Society.
11. Natalie Juristo and Ana M. Moreno. Basics of Software Engineering Experimentation. Springer, 2001.
12. Sebastian Kleinschmager. An empirical study using Java and Groovy about the impact of static type systems on developer performance when using and adapting software systems. Master Thesis at the Institute for Computer Science and Business Information Systems, University of Duisburg-Essen, 2011.
13. Clemens Mayer, Stefan Hanenberg, Romain Robbes, Éric Tanter, and Andreas Stefik. Static type systems (sometimes) have a positive impact on the usability of undocumented software: An empirical evaluation. Technical Report TR/DCC-2012-5, University of Chile, apr 2012.
14. Benjamin C. Pierce. Types and programming languages. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA, 2002.
15. Lutz Prechelt. An empirical comparison of seven programming languages, ieee computer (33). Computer, 33:23-29, 2000.
16. Lutz Prechelt. Kontrollierte Experimente in der Softwaretechnik. Springer, Berlin, March 2001.
17. Lutz Prechelt and Walter F. Tichy. A controlled experiment to assess the benefits of procedure argument type checking. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng., 24(4):302-312, 1998.
18. Gregor Richards, Christian Hammer, Brian Burg, and Jan Vitek. The eval that men do - a large-scale study of the use of eval in javascript applications. In ECOOP 2011 - Object-Oriented Programming - 25th European Conference, Lancaster, UK, July 25-29, 2011 Proceedings, pages 52-78, 2011.
19. Dag I. K. Sjøberg, Jo E. Hannay, Ove Hansen, Vigdis By Kampenes, Amela Karahasanović, Nils-Kristian Liborg, and Anette C. Rekdal. A survey of controlled experiments in software engineering. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng., 31(9):733-753, 2005.
20. Marvin Steinberg and Stefan Hanenberg. What is the impact of static type systems on debugging type errors and semantic errors? an empirical study of differences in debugging time using statically and dynamically typed languages - unpublished work in progress.
21. Andreas Stuchlik and Stefan Hanenberg. Static vs. dynamic type systems: An empirical study about the relationship between type casts and development time. In Proceedings of the 7th Symposium on Dynamic Languages, DLS 2011, October 24, 2011, Portland, OR, USA, pages 97-106. ACM, 2011.
22. Laurence Tratt. Dynamically typed languages. Advances in Computers, 77:149-184, July 2009.
23. Claes Wohlin, Per Runeson, Martin Höst, Magnus C. Ohlsson, Bjöorn Regnell, and Anders Wesslén. Experimentation in software engineering: an introduction. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell, MA, USA, 2000.