Jan Vitek

Emery D. Berger, Petr Maj, Olga Vitek et al.

Ray, Devanbu and Filkov issued a rebuttal of our TOPLAS paper "On the Impact of Programming Languages on Code Quality: A Reproduction Study". Our paper reproduced "A Large-Scale Study of Programming Languages and Code Quality in GitHub", which appeared at FSE 2014 and was subsequently republished as a CACM research highlight in 2017. This article is a rebuttal to that rebuttal.

Filip Křikava, Heather Miller, Jan Vitek

The Scala programming language offers two distinctive language features implicit parameters and implicit conversions, often referred together as implicits. Announced without fanfare in 2004, implicits have quickly grown to become a widely and pervasively used feature of the language. They provide a way to reduce the boilerplate code in Scala programs. They are also used to implement certain language features without having to modify the compiler. We report on a large-scale study of the use of implicits in the wild. For this, we analyzed 7,280 Scala projects hosted on GitHub, spanning over 8.1M call sites involving implicits and 370.7K implicit declarations across 18.7M lines of Scala code.

Emery D. Berger, Celeste Hollenbeck, Petr Maj et al.

This paper is a reproduction of work by Ray et al. which claimed to have uncovered a statistically significant association between eleven programming languages and software defects in projects hosted on GitHub. First we conduct an experimental repetition, repetition is only partially successful, but it does validate one of the key claims of the original work about the association of ten programming languages with defects. Next, we conduct a complete, independent reanalysis of the data and statistical modeling steps of the original study. We uncover a number of flaws that undermine the conclusions of the original study as only four languages are found to have a statistically significant association with defects, and even for those the effect size is exceedingly small. We conclude with some additional sources of bias that should be investigated in follow up work and a few best practice recommendations for similar efforts.