A Large Scale Study of Programming Languages and Code Quality in GitHub [pdf]

Re:A Large Scale Study of Programming Languages and Code Qua... by oskarth on Tuesday November 04, 2014 @03:04PM (#8558745)

From the conclusion:

The data indicates functional languages are better than procedural languages; it suggest that strong typing is better than weaking typic; that static typing is better than dynamic; and that managed memory usage is better than unmanaged.

Obviously not the last word, but interesting study nonetheless.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A Large Scale Study of Programming Languages and Code Qua... by djur on Tuesday November 04, 2014 @04:50PM (#8559272)

The worst outcome was for Procedural-Static-Weak-Unmanaged, aka C and C++. There is no OO category, since most OO languages can be (and are) used in a procedural style.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A Large Scale Study of Programming Languages and Code Qua... by pathikrit on Tuesday November 04, 2014 @04:59PM (#8559320)

Because there are no Procedural-Dynamic-Weak-Unmanaged languages :)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A Large Scale Study of Programming Languages and Code Qua... by abecedarius on Tuesday November 04, 2014 @05:28PM (#8559450)

Forth! (I haven't read the paper.)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A Large Scale Study of Programming Languages and Code Qua... by Immortalin on Tuesday November 04, 2014 @07:20PM (#8559877)

Forth is untyped, not dynamically typed. ;)

[ Parent | on HN ]