On Saturday 03 March 2007 03:02:19 am Carlos E. R. wrote:
The Friday 2007-03-02 at 20:09 -0800, Kai Ponte wrote:
We just went into production at my current workspace with an enterprise-scale application that took three programmers a little over a year to code. The design and requirements took roughly four years. We're actually on the ninth point-release since 1/2/07 (2.1.07 for those on the right side of the Atlantic).
Which leaves me without knowing for certain which month it is, the 2nd or the first... So, assuming it is February, why not "7-2-1"? Or the ISO format in my reply-leadin line above ;-) There is no doubt seeing "2007-03-02" which is the year and the month and the day.
Well, not wanting to get dragged down in the "my-date-format-is-better-than-yours" war, how's 2007-01-02? (January 2nd - a.k.a. the first Monday business day in California this year.)
Had we done the code in C++ or even ASM, it is possible we could have either expanded the code or lessened it. I don't know at this time and it is a mute point. Writing in a 3GL such as C# allowed us to not worry about memory management in the way we would have been forced to had we writtin in a 2GL or - heaven forbid - assembler.
I'm interested in this: can you expand, or point to a link? Maybe I'll have a look at the wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-generation_programming_language http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth-generation_programming_language http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programming_language#Generational_view Though not universally agreed-upon - I tend to lump C#/Java or other Form-based languages with the 3GL crowd. Many like to see C++ as either a 3GL or a 2GL. I
The "bloat" to which many people refer often is a result of added functionality. Let's face it - adding a GUI with lots of dummy-proof features - adds code and complexity. I'm sure Vi has a lot less code than does OpenOffice.
I'll give an example, an old one.
I don't remember which version of Turbo Pascal produced a minumum ~30 KiB exe, just to write a "hello world" in the screen. Then, they invented what they called "smart linking", and it went down to 2 or 4 KiB! The thing is that their linker was clever enough to remove all functions from the linked libraries not actually called in the program. The "Turbo C" version of the same vintage didn't have the same ability.
You know, I remember that. I used to write Pascal on my Apple II after I realized the limitations of BASIC. Heh! -- kai Free Compean and Ramos http://www.grassfire.org/142/petition.asp http://www.perfectreign.com/?q=node/46 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org