[mercury-users] Error detection rate in Mercury vs Other Languages (esp C++ and Python)

[Peter Ross]

Hi Charles,

On 1 December 2011 01:07, Charles Shuller <charles.shuller at gmail.com> wrote:
> All,
>
> I'm curious if anyone can share their impressions, or references to
> peer-reviewed papers, on the rate of error detection by the Mercury
> compiler versus other compilers or run-times/interpreters.
>
> I'm under the impression that the Mercury compiler is able to detect
> significantly more errors that a C++ compiler, or Python run-time
> (assuming some reasonable test suite); however, I've realized that I
> have no basis for that impression, and am wondering if there is any
> justification for my belief.
>
In my experience, it is rare for one to be able to write a program
that the Mercury compiler doesn't report errors on the first attempt.
However once one fixes all the problems it is significantly more
likely for the program to run correctly first time.

I do most of my development in Java and Mercury.  In Java it is much
more likely for the program to compile, but much more likely to throw
an exception the first time you run the program.

Why?

Mercury is strongly typed, and types are not nullable.  This means
that the compiler can check more of the declarations that you provide
about the program.

Pete
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
mercury-users mailing list
Post messages to:       mercury-users at csse.unimelb.edu.au
Administrative Queries: owner-mercury-users at csse.unimelb.edu.au
Subscriptions:          mercury-users-request at csse.unimelb.edu.au
--------------------------------------------------------------------------