Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #8039

Re: Style Police (a rant)

From Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid>
Newsgroups comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject Re: Style Police (a rant)
Date 2011-09-14 20:47 -0400
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <j4ri24$p96$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References (4 earlier) <slrnj6pdj2.6gl.avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> <j4if8u$mc5$1@dont-email.me> <jI4bq.13256$GG2.3813@newsfe01.iad> <4e6d1fc5$0$308$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <slrnj717ia.6gl.avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at>

Show all headers | View raw


On 9/14/2011 8:30 AM, Andreas Leitgeb wrote:
> Arne Vajhøj<arne@vajhoej.dk>  wrote:
>> On 9/11/2011 11:45 AM, Arved Sandstrom wrote:
>>> I agree, the problems are already more than big enough. I figure that
>>> my Java-based work only, can be described as roughly 2/3 maintenance,
>>> 1/3 new code, as of now and the past few years.
>> And 1/3 new code is probably above industry average.
>
> The distinction between "new code" and "maintenance" doesn't quite cut it.
>
> A more interesting percentage might be: maintaining one's own code versus
> maintaining someone else's code.

     This is important. If you advocate code re-use, it follows that
you advocate spending more time maintaining and less originating.  If
your preferences run the other way, you are not re-using enough code.

     When I was young (shovelling coal into the furnaces of the early
steam-powered computers, and leering lasciviously at Lovelace), memory
was short and CPU cycles long: Both were scarce and hence expensive.
Programmer labor (sometimes called human labor, but that's debatable)
was cheap in comparison.  The product of that labor was therefore also
cheap, easy to discard and re-write.  "Re-doing it better" was laudable.

     But memories have grown and CPU cycles have shrunk.  I recall a
machine whose time was billed at $100/hour, during which time it could
perform maybe 0.3 billion instructions (if it never had to wait for
I/O and there wasn't too much floating-point in the mix).  Today's
machines can get through 0.3 billion instructions in a second or two:
That's more than three decimal orders of magnitude faster.  That same
machine deployed 1/8 MB of memory; nowadays even a bare-bones El Cheapo
laptop has 2 GB, four decimal orders of magnitude more.  And the old
machine cost maybe $500,000 instead of $700 (which is about $125 in
1970 dollars), for another three-plus decimal orders of magnitude
improvement.

     Meanwhile, the appetite for code -- the demand for programmer
output -- has risen, and although the supply of programmer labor has
increased and the tools of programmer productivity have improved, they
have not kept pace with demand.  The balance is reversed: Programmer
time is scarce and expensive, CPU time and memory are plentiful and
cheap.

     So if you want to produce software cost-effectively, it follows
that you *must* re-use existing code.  And if you must re-use code,
it follows that you must maintain it -- and the really cost-effective
programmer, the one who will get to market first and with lower
overheads than the competition, will be the one who writes *no*
original code at all.  It's too slow and expensive, and too last
millennium.

     Ponder this, while thinking about the average Computer Science
curriculum.  "Students, today you will implement an AVL tree."  Bah!

-- 
Eric Sosman
esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar


Thread

Re: Style Police (a rant) Wanja Gayk <brixomatic@yahoo.com> - 2011-09-10 06:45 +0200
  Re: Style Police (a rant) Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-09-10 11:40 +0000
    Re: Style Police (a rant) Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-09-10 14:06 -0700
      Re: Style Police (a rant) Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-09-11 14:07 +0000
        Re: Style Police (a rant) Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-09-11 10:55 -0400
          Re: Style Police (a rant) Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-09-11 23:34 +0000
        Re: Style Police (a rant) Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-09-11 10:58 -0400
          Re: Style Police (a rant) Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-09-11 10:12 -0700
          Re: Style Police (a rant) Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-09-14 12:22 +0000
          Re: Style Police (a rant) Bent C Dalager <bcd@pvv.ntnu.no> - 2011-09-14 15:04 +0000
            Re: Style Police (a rant) Paul Cager <paul.cager@googlemail.com> - 2011-09-14 09:36 -0700
        Re: Style Police (a rant) Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-09-11 09:47 -0700
          Re: Style Police (a rant) Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-09-11 23:32 +0000
            Re: Style Police (a rant) Wanja Gayk <brixomatic@yahoo.com> - 2011-09-17 00:57 +0200
              Re: Style Police (a rant) Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-09-17 19:56 +0000
        Re: Style Police (a rant) Wanja Gayk <brixomatic@yahoo.com> - 2011-09-11 21:20 +0200
          Re: Style Police (a rant) Cthun <cthun_117@qmail.net.au> - 2011-09-11 17:11 -0400
            Re: Style Police (a rant) Wanja Gayk <brixomatic@yahoo.com> - 2011-09-12 01:22 +0200
              Re: Style Police (a rant) Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-09-11 21:13 -0400
            Re: Style Police (a rant) Retahiv Oopsiscame <roopsisc@gmail.com> - 2011-09-11 16:54 -0700
              Re: Style Police (a rant) Cthun <cthun_117@qmail.net.au> - 2011-09-11 23:42 -0400
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Retahiv Oopsiscame <roopsisc@gmail.com> - 2011-09-12 21:54 -0700
                Re: Style Police (a rant) "Cthun" <cthun_117@qmail.net.au> - 2011-09-13 07:18 -0400
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Cthun <cthun_117@qmail.net.au> - 2011-09-13 10:07 -0400
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-09-13 08:15 -0700
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Cthun <cthun_117@qmail.net.au> - 2011-09-13 12:00 -0400
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Cthun <cthun_117@qmail.net.au> - 2011-09-13 10:10 -0400
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Retahiv Oopsiscame <roopsisc@gmail.com> - 2011-09-13 09:55 -0700
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Cthun <cthun_117@qmail.net.au> - 2011-09-15 10:37 -0400
                Re: Style Police (a rant) "Cthun" <cthun_9112011@qmail.net.au> - 2011-09-15 22:58 -0400
                Murphy = Troll [DO NOT FEED] thoolen <th00len@th0lenbot.thorium> - 2011-09-16 00:23 -0400
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Retahiv Oopsiscame <roopsisc@gmail.com> - 2011-09-16 03:26 -0700
                Re: Style Police (a rant) un-Bent <dob@dib.dib.null> - 2011-09-16 13:02 +0000
                Murphy = Troll [DO NOT FEED] thoolen <th00len@th0lenbot.thorium> - 2011-09-16 22:40 -0400
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Cthun <cthun_117@qmail.net.au> - 2011-09-17 19:36 -0400
                Re: Style Police (a rant) "kaffel'latte" <jiggingjava@qmail.net> - 2011-09-19 08:58 -0400
                Re: Style Police (a rant) thoolen <th00len@th0lenbot.thorium> - 2011-09-19 11:56 -0400
                Re: Style Police (a rant) "kaffel'latte" <jiggingjava@qmail.net> - 2011-09-19 17:05 -0400
                Re: Style Police (a rant) thoolen <th00len@th0lenbot.thorium> - 2011-09-19 19:13 -0400
                Re: Style Police (a rant) k00k Derbyshire spins freely "kaffel'latte" <jiggingjava@qmail.net> - 2011-09-19 20:45 -0400
                Re: Style Police (a rant) k00k Derbyshire spins freely thoolen <th00len@th0lenbot.thorium> - 2011-09-21 18:37 -0400
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Retahiv Oopsiscame <roopsisc@gmail.com> - 2011-09-26 15:13 -0700
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Cthun <cthun_117@qmail.net.au> - 2011-09-26 19:34 -0400
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Retahiv Oopsiscame <roopsisc@gmail.com> - 2011-10-01 06:49 -0700
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-10-01 09:21 -0700
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Cthun <cthun_117@qmail.net.au> - 2011-10-01 14:17 -0400
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Wanja Gayk <brixomatic@yahoo.com> - 2011-10-01 20:53 +0200
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Cthun <cthun_117@qmail.net.au> - 2011-10-01 21:12 -0400
              Re: Style Police (a rant) "Cthun" <cthun_117@qmail.net.au> - 2011-09-12 04:56 -0400
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Cthun <cthun_117@qmail.net.au> - 2011-09-12 05:12 -0400
              Re: Style Police (a rant) "Cthun" <cthun_117@qmail.net.au> - 2011-09-12 04:59 -0400
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Cthun <cthun_117@qmail.net.au> - 2011-09-12 05:13 -0400
          Re: Style Police (a rant) Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-09-11 23:17 +0000
            Re: Style Police (a rant) Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-09-11 21:12 -0400
            Re: Style Police (a rant) Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-09-12 07:36 -0300
          Re: Style Police (a rant) "Cthun" <cthun_117@qmail.net.au> - 2011-09-12 04:58 -0400
            Re: Style Police (a rant) Cthun <cthun_117@qmail.net.au> - 2011-09-12 05:12 -0400
    Re: Style Police (a rant) Wanja Gayk <brixomatic@yahoo.com> - 2011-09-11 15:33 +0200
      Re: Style Police (a rant) Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-09-11 09:42 -0700
        Re: Style Police (a rant) Lars Enderin <lars.enderin@telia.com> - 2011-09-11 20:35 +0200
          Re: Style Police (a rant) Retahiv Oopsiscame <roopsisc@gmail.com> - 2011-09-11 16:55 -0700
            Re: Style Police (a rant) Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-09-11 20:36 -0700
              Re: Style Police (a rant) Lars Enderin <lars.enderin@telia.com> - 2011-09-12 10:05 +0200
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-09-12 15:35 -0700
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Lars Enderin <lars.enderin@telia.com> - 2011-09-13 10:35 +0200
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Retahiv Oopsiscame <roopsisc@gmail.com> - 2011-09-13 09:48 -0700
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-09-13 12:18 -0700
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Retahiv Oopsiscame <roopsisc@gmail.com> - 2011-09-13 17:30 -0700
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Retahiv Oopsiscame <roopsisc@gmail.com> - 2011-09-12 21:59 -0700
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Joe Attardi <jattardi@gmail.com> - 2011-09-23 10:54 -0700
                Re: Style Police (a rant) thoolen <th00len@th0lenbot.thorium> - 2011-09-24 01:54 -0400
                Re: Style Police (a rant) "tholen@antispam.ham" <tholen@ifa.hawaii.edu> - 2011-09-24 02:58 -0700
                Re: Style Police (a rant) thoolen <th00len@th0lenbot.thorium> - 2011-09-24 11:35 -0400
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Joe Attardi <jattardi@gmail.com> - 2011-09-26 13:50 -0700
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Jane Doe <jdoe@love.in.d.jungle.invalid> - 2011-09-26 21:14 +0000
                Re: Style Police (a rant) thoolen <th00len@th0lenbot.thorium> - 2011-09-26 17:50 -0400
                Re: Style Police (a rant) thoolen <th00len@th0lenbot.thorium> - 2011-09-26 17:47 -0400
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Retahiv Oopsiscame <roopsisc@gmail.com> - 2011-09-26 15:17 -0700
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Jane Doe <jdoe@love.in.d.jungle.invalid> - 2011-09-27 00:50 +0000
                Re: Style Police (a rant) tisue@cs.nwu.edu (Seth Tisue) - 2011-09-27 08:55 -0600
                Re: Style Police (a rant) thoolen <th00len@th0lenbot.thorium> - 2011-09-27 14:14 -0400
                Re: Style Police (a rant) thoolen <th00len@th0lenbot.thorium> - 2011-09-27 14:11 -0400
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Retahiv Oopsiscame <roopsisc@gmail.com> - 2011-10-01 07:31 -0700
                Re: Style Police (a rant) thoolen <th00len@th0lenbot.thorium> - 2011-09-26 22:24 -0400
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Jane Doe <jdoe@love.in.d.jungle.invalid> - 2011-09-27 09:30 +0000
                Re: Style Police (a rant) tisue@cs.nwu.edu (Seth Tisue) - 2011-09-27 08:57 -0600
                Re: Style Police (a rant) thoolen <th00len@th0lenbot.thorium> - 2011-09-27 14:38 -0400
                Re: Style Police (a rant) thoolen <th00len@th0lenbot.thorium> - 2011-09-27 14:36 -0400
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2011-09-30 15:58 +0000
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Retahiv Oopsiscame <roopsisc@gmail.com> - 2011-10-01 07:32 -0700
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-09-30 21:26 -0400
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Retahiv Oopsiscame <roopsisc@gmail.com> - 2011-10-01 07:34 -0700
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-10-01 15:51 -0400
                Re: Style Police (a rant) "Cthun" <cthun_117@qmail.net.au> - 2011-10-01 16:26 -0400
                Re: Style Police (a rant) thoolen <th00len@th0lenbot.thorium> - 2011-10-01 21:25 -0400
              Re: Style Police (a rant) Retahiv Oopsiscame <roopsisc@gmail.com> - 2011-09-12 21:58 -0700
            Re: Style Police (a rant) "Cthun" <cthun_117@qmail.net.au> - 2011-09-12 04:52 -0400
              Re: Style Police (a rant) Cthun <cthun_117@qmail.net.au> - 2011-09-12 05:14 -0400
                Re: Style Police (a rant) "Cthun" <cthun_117@qmail.net.au> - 2011-09-12 06:42 -0400
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Cthun <cthun_117@qmail.net.au> - 2011-09-12 07:20 -0400
                Re: Style Police (a rant) "Cthun" <cthun_117@qmail.net.au> - 2011-09-12 08:46 -0400
                Re: Style Police (a rant) thoolen <th00len@th0lenbot.thorium> - 2011-09-12 21:03 -0400
          Re: Style Police (a rant) Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-09-12 20:18 +0100
        Re: Style Police (a rant) Wanja Gayk <brixomatic@yahoo.com> - 2011-09-11 21:20 +0200
          Re: Style Police (a rant) Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-09-11 13:52 -0700
      Re: Style Police (a rant) Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-09-12 00:17 +0000
  Re: Style Police (a rant) Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-09-10 21:32 -0400
    Re: Style Police (a rant) Wanja Gayk <brixomatic@yahoo.com> - 2011-09-11 13:27 +0200
      Re: Style Police (a rant) Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-09-11 11:05 -0400
    Re: Style Police (a rant) Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-09-11 13:23 +0000
      Re: Style Police (a rant) Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-09-11 10:04 -0400
        Re: Style Police (a rant) Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-09-11 12:45 -0300
          Re: Style Police (a rant) Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-09-11 16:53 -0400
            Re: Style Police (a rant) Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-09-14 12:30 +0000
              Re: Style Police (a rant) Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-09-14 20:47 -0400
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-09-14 18:06 -0700
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-09-15 10:06 +0000
                Re: Style Police (a rant) blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> - 2011-09-20 11:28 +0000
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-09-20 07:36 -0400
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-09-20 13:04 +0000
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-09-20 20:34 -0300
              Re: Style Police (a rant) Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-09-14 22:33 -0300
                Re: Style Police (a rant) Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-09-15 13:46 +0000
              Re: Style Police (a rant) Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-09-14 21:40 -0400
      Re: Style Police (a rant) Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-09-11 10:59 -0400
        Re: Style Police (a rant) Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-09-11 21:25 +0000

csiph-web