Software errors and complexity: an empirical investigation0
Communications of the ACM
Papers presented at the first workshop on empirical studies of programmers on Empirical studies of programmers
Analyzing the high frequency bugs in novice programs
Papers presented at the first workshop on empirical studies of programmers on Empirical studies of programmers
Novice programmer errors: language constructs and plan composition
International Journal of Human-Computer Studies
A Discipline for Software Engineering
A Discipline for Software Engineering
An Experimental Comparison of the Effectiveness of Branch Testing and Data Flow Testing
IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
A Preliminary Software Engineering Theory as Investigated by Published Experiments
Empirical Software Engineering
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
This paper reports on an experiment to assess the error detection capabilities of static, inter-module type checking. Type checking is considered an important mechanism for detecting programming errors, especially interface errors. The experiment uses Kernighan&Ritchie C and ANSI C. The relevant difference is that the ANSI C compiler checks module interfaces (i.e., the parameter lists of calls to external functions), whereas K&R C does not. The experiment employs a counterbalanced design, in which each subject writes two non-trivial programs that interface with a complex library (Motif). Each subject writes one program in K&R C and one in ANSI C. The input to each compiler run is saved and manually analyzed for errors. Results indicate that delivered ANSI C programs contain significantly fewer interface errors than delivered K&R C programs. Furthermore, after subjects have gained some familiarity with the interface they are using, ANSI C programmers remove errors faster and are more productive (measured in both time to completion and functionality implemented).