行为渐进式:一种用户研究

P. Wilson, B. Greenman, Justin Pombrio, S. Krishnamurthi
{"title":"行为渐进式:一种用户研究","authors":"P. Wilson, B. Greenman, Justin Pombrio, S. Krishnamurthi","doi":"10.1145/3276945.3276947","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There are several different gradual typing semantics, reflecting different trade-offs between performance and type soundness guarantees. Notably absent, however, are any data on which of these semantics developers actually prefer. We begin to rectify this shortcoming by surveying professional developers, computer science students, and Mechanical Turk workers on their preferences between three gradual typing semantics. These semantics reflect important points in the design space, corresponding to the behaviors of Typed Racket, TypeScript, and Reticulated Python. Our most important finding is that our respondents prefer a runtime semantics that fully enforces statically declared types.","PeriodicalId":113872,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 14th ACM SIGPLAN International Symposium on Dynamic Languages","volume":"26 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"12","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The behavior of gradual types: a user study\",\"authors\":\"P. Wilson, B. Greenman, Justin Pombrio, S. Krishnamurthi\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3276945.3276947\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"There are several different gradual typing semantics, reflecting different trade-offs between performance and type soundness guarantees. Notably absent, however, are any data on which of these semantics developers actually prefer. We begin to rectify this shortcoming by surveying professional developers, computer science students, and Mechanical Turk workers on their preferences between three gradual typing semantics. These semantics reflect important points in the design space, corresponding to the behaviors of Typed Racket, TypeScript, and Reticulated Python. Our most important finding is that our respondents prefer a runtime semantics that fully enforces statically declared types.\",\"PeriodicalId\":113872,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the 14th ACM SIGPLAN International Symposium on Dynamic Languages\",\"volume\":\"26 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-10-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"12\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the 14th ACM SIGPLAN International Symposium on Dynamic Languages\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3276945.3276947\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 14th ACM SIGPLAN International Symposium on Dynamic Languages","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3276945.3276947","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

摘要

有几种不同的渐进式类型语义,反映了性能和类型稳健性保证之间的不同权衡。然而,值得注意的是,没有任何数据表明开发人员实际上更喜欢哪种语义。我们通过调查专业开发人员、计算机科学学生和Mechanical Turk工作人员对三种渐进式类型语义的偏好来纠正这一缺点。这些语义反映了设计空间中的重要点,对应于Typed Racket、TypeScript和Reticulated Python的行为。我们最重要的发现是,我们的受访者更喜欢完全执行静态声明类型的运行时语义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The behavior of gradual types: a user study
There are several different gradual typing semantics, reflecting different trade-offs between performance and type soundness guarantees. Notably absent, however, are any data on which of these semantics developers actually prefer. We begin to rectify this shortcoming by surveying professional developers, computer science students, and Mechanical Turk workers on their preferences between three gradual typing semantics. These semantics reflect important points in the design space, corresponding to the behaviors of Typed Racket, TypeScript, and Reticulated Python. Our most important finding is that our respondents prefer a runtime semantics that fully enforces statically declared types.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信