Dave Tweed wrote: > If you discard `compliation preventing, very very quick to solve' bugs > (e.g., missing semi-colons in C++, silly typecheck errors in Haskell) I > find that the ratio between source code bugs and algorithm bugs is maybe > 1:5. This means that whilst I find Haskell a great deal easier to write > correctly than C++, there's not that much difference between debugging > times for Haskell and C++ because the algorithm level bugs dominate.
In my experience, the number of algorithm bugs is usually about the same, regardless of which language you're using. And simple source code bugs are no real problem in any language. But because there's more translation involved in rendering a mental model of an algorithm in C++ than in Haskell, there's much more opportunity for introducing more subtle source code bugs. I find that I very rarely have these kinds of bugs in Haskell (and the type-checker usually catches them anyway), but they were always the largest proportion of bugs when I used to program in C, etc. A -- Andy Moran Ph. (503) 526 3472 Galois Connections Inc. Fax. (503) 350 0833 3875 SW Hall Blvd. http://www.galois.com Beaverton, OR 97005 [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
