Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #31518
| From | Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.programmer |
| Subject | Re: Return of the Applets? |
| Date | 2015-04-07 13:29 +0000 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <mg0m3n$qb4$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | (5 earlier) <mfuljg$l3a$1@dont-email.me> <mfuu0u$nqj$1@dont-email.me> <mfuums$q9u$1@dont-email.me> <mfv4kv$9q2$1@dont-email.me> <mfv6j3$n7p$1@dont-email.me> |
On Mon, 06 Apr 2015 19:59:18 -0400, Jerry Stuckle wrote: > To a certain extent, yes. But OTOH, a lot of the advantages and > disadvantages of individual languages tend to balance out. > Only if you're comparing similar languages. Using a good 4GL I can easily write an accounting type program that maintains a detail record file that contains references to three or four other files, fully validating all inputs and doing it on a neatly laid out screen. That interactive program, together with reporting program to show whats in the detail records in a meaningful, neat layout can easily be written and tested in a normal working day. The interactive program will typically be under 200 lines and the report program will be under 60 lines, so a total of 260 LOC. I don't know of any HLL or assembler that can come anywhere near that, either in terms of LOC counts or development time. IOW using LOC to compare a 4GL with, say, COBOL or Java just doesn't work. The fact that I can develop and test a program in a day using a 4GL that would take a week in Java and longer in COBOL says nothing about the skill or productivity of programmers doing similar tasks and doesn't help a lot with project estimation either if, as often happens, the project sponsor gets to pick the programming language. Its much better to use something more abstract, such as function point analysis simply because the number of function points in a program or system depends on the requirements and not on the programming language. This way you use function points to estimate specification, design and testing effort, all of which are independent of the programming language and then apply a language multiplier to the function point total, which gives the required programming effort. > Which has nothing to do with LOC measurements. > Agreed, but documentation effort should be factored in if the system being developed isn't just a throw-away being built round a one-off event. LOC counting can't do that. Function point counting would do better here if you add a documentation effort factor for each function point. This would be as equally valid for traditional module document writing as it is for a combined approach, e.g. via javadocs for Java or cdocs/oxygen for C. > And while APL has some > advantages in some statements (i.e. mathematical constructs), it has > disadvantages in others (i.e. file operations). > That applies to pretty much all all languages: try accessing serial ports from pretty much anything except C or assembler, TCP/IP networks from Fortran or COBOL or anything except the terminal, printer and target DBMS from a traditional 4GL. >> Bottom line: a good programmer uses clear, well thought out comments >> throughout his code and sensible programming groups require it as part >> of their work packages because they know it will make changes easier. >> But nonetheless comments are ignored by almost all LOC statistics >> gathering tools. IMO this devalues the use of LOC counting for anything >> except estimating new projects and even there its results tend not to >> be valid outside a particular organisation and programming environment. >> >> > Which is true for all languages and has nothing to do with which > language is more popular. > True, but it has a lot to do with using LOC stats for estimating projects because documentation effort is invisible to LOC counting and testing effort isn't much better served either. -- martin@ | Martin Gregorie gregorie. | Essex, UK org |
Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: Return of the Applets? Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-04-05 09:46 -0400
Re: Return of the Applets? Jeff Higgins <jeff@invalid.invalid> - 2015-04-05 13:12 -0400
Re: Return of the Applets? Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-04-05 15:14 -0400
Re: Return of the Applets? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2015-04-05 16:41 -0400
Re: Return of the Applets? Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-04-05 16:54 -0400
Re: Return of the Applets? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2015-04-05 17:08 -0400
Re: Return of the Applets? Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-04-05 17:17 -0400
Re: Return of the Applets? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2015-04-05 17:30 -0400
Re: Return of the Applets? Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-04-05 17:42 -0400
Re: Return of the Applets? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2015-04-05 17:52 -0400
Re: Return of the Applets? Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-04-05 18:17 -0400
Re: Return of the Applets? Luuk <luuk@invalid.lan> - 2015-04-06 11:26 +0200
Re: Return of the Applets? Joshua Cranmer 🐧 <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2015-04-06 13:23 -0500
Re: Return of the Applets? Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-04-06 15:09 -0400
Re: Return of the Applets? Joshua Cranmer 🐧 <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2015-04-06 17:33 -0500
Re: Return of the Applets? Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-04-06 17:44 -0400
Re: Return of the Applets? Joshua Cranmer 🐧 <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2015-04-06 19:10 -0500
Re: Return of the Applets? Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-04-06 20:03 -0400
Re: Return of the Applets? Joshua Cranmer 🐧 <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2015-04-06 21:36 -0500
Re: Return of the Applets? Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-04-07 09:11 -0400
Re: Return of the Applets? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-04-06 23:25 +0000
Re: Return of the Applets? Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-04-06 19:59 -0400
Re: Return of the Applets? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-04-07 13:29 +0000
Re: Return of the Applets? Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-04-07 10:45 -0400
Re: Return of the Applets? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-04-07 15:51 +0000
Re: Return of the Applets? Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-04-07 13:16 -0400
Re: Return of the Applets? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-04-07 20:22 +0000
Re: Return of the Applets? Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-04-07 17:03 -0400
Re: Return of the Applets? Leif Roar Moldskred <leifm@huldreskog.localdomain> - 2015-04-07 11:34 -0500
Re: Return of the Applets? Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-04-07 13:18 -0400
Re: Return of the Applets? Leif Roar Moldskred <leifm@huldreskog.localdomain> - 2015-04-07 12:40 -0500
Re: Return of the Applets? Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-04-07 17:06 -0400
Re: Return of the Applets? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-04-07 20:28 +0000
Re: Return of the Applets? Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-04-07 17:11 -0400
Re: Return of the Applets? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-04-07 23:00 +0000
Re: Return of the Applets? Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-04-07 19:25 -0400
Re: Return of the Applets? Joshua Cranmer 🐧 <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2015-04-06 13:09 -0500
csiph-web