An empirical study of the influence of static type systems on the usability of undocumented software

ACM SIGPLAN Notices

Volumn 47, Issue 10, 2012, Pages 683-702

  Mayer, Clemens ^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

Empirical research; Programming languages; Type systems

Indexed keywords

COMPLETION TIME; CONTROLLED EXPERIMENT; DOCUMENTATION OF SOFTWARE; DYNAMIC TYPE SYSTEMS; EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE; EMPIRICAL RESEARCH; EMPIRICAL STUDIES; EXPLORATORY STUDIES; PROGRAMMING TASKS; STATIC AND DYNAMIC; STATIC TYPE SYSTEMS; TYPE SYSTEMS;

APPLICATION PROGRAMMING INTERFACES (API); COMPUTER PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES; COMPUTER SYSTEMS PROGRAMMING; OBJECT ORIENTED PROGRAMMING;

JAVA PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE;

EID: 84870476453     PISSN: 15232867     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1145/2398857.2384666     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (29)

1. BIRD, R., AND WADLER, P. An introduction to functional programming. Prentice Hall International (UK) Ltd., Hertfordshire, UK, UK, 1988.
2. BORTZ, J. Statistik: für Human-und Sozialwissenschaftler, 6., vollst. überarb. u. aktualisierte aufl. ed. Springer, September 2005.
3. BROOKS, R. E. Studying programmer behavior experimentally: the problems of proper methodology. Commun. ACM 23 (April 1980), 207-213.
4. BRUCE, K. B. Foundations of object-oriented languages: types and semantics. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA, 2002.
5. CURTIS, B. Five paradigms in the psychology of programming. In Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction, M. Helander, Ed. Elsevier (North-Holland), 1988, pp. 87-106.
6. DALY, M. T., SAZAWAL, V., AND FOSTER, J. S. 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).
7. FENTON, N. E., AND PFLEEGER, S. L. Software Metrics: A Rigorous and Practical Approach. PWS Publishing Co., Boston, MA, USA, 1998.
8. GANNON, J. D. An experimental evaluation of data type conventions. Commun. ACM 20, 8 (1977), 584-595.
9. GRAVETTER, F., AND WALLNAU, L. Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences. Cengage Learning, 2008.
10. HANENBERG, S. 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 applicationsProceedings of the ACM international conference on Object oriented programming systems languages and applicationsProceedings of the ACM international conference on Object oriented programming systems languages and applications (New York, NY, USA, 2010), OOPSLA '10, ACM, pp. 22-35.
11. HANENBERG, S. Faith, hope, and love: An essay on software science's neglect of human factors. In Proceedings of the ACM international conference on Object oriented programming systems languages and applicationsProceedings of the ACM international conference on Object oriented programming systems languages and applicationsProceedings of the ACM international conference on Object oriented programming systems languages and applications (Reno/Tahoe, Nevada, USA, October 2010), OOPSLA '10, pp. 933-946.
12. HANENBERG, S. A chronological experience report from an initial experiment series on static type systems. In 2nd Workshop on Empirical Evaluation of Software Composition Techniques (ESCOT)2nd Workshop on Empirical Evaluation of Software Composition Techniques (ESCOT)2nd Workshop on Empirical Evaluation of Software Composition Techniques (ESCOT) (Lancaster, UK, 2011).
13. JURISTO, N., AND MORENO, A. M. Basics of Software Engineering Experimentation. Springer, 2001.
14. KAWRYKOW, D., AND ROBILLARD, M. P. Improving API usage through automatic detection of redundant code. In ASE 2009, 24th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, Auckland, New Zealand, November 16-20, 2009ASE 2009, 24th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, Auckland, New Zealand, November 16-20, 2009ASE 2009, 24th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, Auckland, New Zealand, November 16-20, 2009 (2009), IEEE Computer Society, pp. 111-122.
15. KLEINSCHMAGER, S., HANENBERG, S., ROBBES, R., TANTER, É., AND STEFIK, A. Do static type systems improve the maintainability of software systems? An empirical study. In IEEE 20th International Conference on Program Comprehension, ICPC 2012, Passau, Germany, June 11-13, 2012IEEE 20th International Conference on Program Comprehension, ICPC 2012, Passau, Germany, June 11-13, 2012IEEE 20th International Conference on Program Comprehension, ICPC 2012, Passau, Germany, June 11-13, 2012 (2012), pp. 153-162.
16. KOENIG, D., GLOVER, A., KING, P., LAFORGE, G., AND SKEET, J. Groovy in Action. Manning Publications Co., Greenwich, CT, USA, 2007.
17. MCCONNELL, S. What does 10x mean? Measuring variations in programmer productivity. In Making Software: What Really Works, and Why We Believe It, A. Oram and G.Wilson, Eds., O'Reilly Series. O'Reilly Media, 2010, pp. 567-575.
18. PIERCE, B. C. Types and programming languages. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA, 2002.
19. POTTIER, F., AND RÉMY, D. The essence of ML type inference. In Advanced Topics in Types and Programming Languages, B. C. Pierce, Ed. MIT Press, 2005, ch. 10, pp. 389-489.
20. PRECHELT, L. An empirical comparison of seven programming languages. IEEE Computer 33 (2000), 23-29.
21. PRECHELT, L. Kontrollierte Experimente in der Softwaretechnik. Springer, Berlin, March 2001.
22. PRECHELT, L., AND TICHY, W. F. A controlled experiment to assess the benefits of procedure argument type checking. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 24, 4 (1998), 302-312.
23. RICE, J. A. Mathematical Statistics and Data Analysis. Duxbury Press, Apr. 2001.
24. ROBILLARD, M. P. What makes APIs hard to learn? answers from developers. IEEE Software 26, 6 (2009), 27-34.
25. SHNEIDERMAN, B. Software Psychology: Human Factors in Computer and Information Systems. Winthrop Publishers, August 1980.
26. SIEK, J. G., AND TAHA, W. Gradual typing for objects. In ECOOP 2007-Object-Oriented Programming, 21st European Conference, Berlin, Germany, July 30-August 3, 2007, Proceedings (2007), vol. 4609 of Lecture Notes in Computer ScienceLecture Notes in Computer ScienceLecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer, pp. 2-27.
27. STEINBERG, M., AND HANENBERG, S. 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 -yet published work.
28. STUCHLIK, A., AND HANENBERG, S. 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 languagesProceedings of the 7th symposium on Dynamic languagesProceedings of the 7th symposium on Dynamic languages (Portland, Oregon, USA, 2011), DLS '11, ACM, pp. 97-106.
29. WOHLIN, C., RUNESON, P., HÖST, M., OHLSSON, M. C., REGNELL, B., AND WESSLÉN, A. Experimentation in software engineering: an introduction. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell, MA, USA, 2000.