NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.
All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report
Stories, comments, journals, and other submissions on use Perl; are Copyright 1998-2006, their respective owners.
Sorta (Score:2)
Re:Sorta (Score:1)
Very few people, other than in jest, can assign a number of any type to these statements.
"Well, I'll give vi a 6, emacs an 8, but vim definitely gets a 9.3"
Re:Sorta (Score:2)
Re:Sorta (Score:2)
That's not what Martin Fowler is talking about.
If we really thought hard about it, there might be a reasonable way to measure the productivity of the little things we do on a daily basis -- using text editors or write small programs. That's doubtful, and it's even more doubtful that we could measure project productivity: OK, now do the exact same project with the same team; use XP and no UML this time and see if you can finish it faster.
These types of tests have been done in the past, and about the only thing they can demonstrate is that the most productive programmers are roughly 10x as productive than the average, and everyone has the capability of writing roughly the same number of lines of code per day regardless of the language used.
Sorry, but you can't measure productivity in software. Not in any big, meaningful way.
Reply to This
Parent
Re:Sorta (Score:2)
It is still what I am saying, necessarily. Since the way I measure such things must necessarily be subjective, saying it is better is necessarily saying it is better for me, unless qualified otherwise.
Sorry, but you can't measure productivity in software. Not in any big, meaningful way.
Of course I can, and I do it every day. But it is only big and meaningful to me.