[Paul Brannan]:
>> 	890    2472   26071 c_src
>> 	619    1497   14090 ruby_src
>> 
>> So the C-code was 85 % longer (43 % as many lines).

> Was it C++ code or was it C code?

C++
 
> How much of the C/C++ code was boilerplate and due to the verbosity of
> the C/C++ language rather than to static typing itself?

I don't really know how to judge that. C++ isn't that verbose -- do you
think? I think that where there is verbositiy, it is often a result of 
the static typing (as in vector< pair<int, int> >::iterator i).

If you are interested, I can mail you the code and you can judge for yourself.

// Niklas