Xref: utzoo comp.lang.misc:7403 comp.object:3155
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!udel!rochester!kodak!islsun!cok
From: cok@islsun.Kodak.COM (David Cok)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc,comp.object
Subject: Re: Run-time Type Errors in Smalltalk (was Re: blip (was...))
Message-ID: <1991Apr13.204501.6863@kodak.kodak.com>
Date: 13 Apr 91 20:45:01 GMT
References: <887@puck.mrcu> <OLSON.91Apr6172626@lear.juliet.ll.mit.edu> <4243.2805b94a@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com>
Sender: news@kodak.kodak.com
Organization: Eastman Kodak Co., Rochester, NY
Lines: 13

In article <4243.2805b94a@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com> klimas@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com writes:
>	Some info that I picked up from a company doing a lot of big
>	project work with C++ (i.e. strong type checking language) was
>	that postmortems on their project revealed only 10% of their
>	errors were captured by strong type checking.

Did they really count ALL the errors -- including every time a compile failed
because of type errors?  It seems to me most type errors would be caught
before a peice of code even got into some error tracking process.

David R. Cok
Eastman Kodak Company
cok@Kodak.COM