Paul,
Did I say you were too old? Don't remember - I must be having a senior
moment :-) .
I did work one place where they ended up putting in more functionality and
generating LESS code. It drove QA nuts; they couldn't figure out how they
could do that. I agree a lot of times less is more.
Jim
--
Replace part of the email address: kennedy-down_with_spammers_at_attbi.com
with family. Remove the negative part, keep the minus sign. You can figure
it out.
"Paul Brewer" <paul_at_paul.brewers.org.uk> wrote in message
news:3e94aa58_3_at_mk-nntp-1.news.uk.worldonline.com...
> "Karsten Farrell" <kfarrell_at_belgariad.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.18fdf44d12c047dc989728_at_news.la.sbcglobal.net...
> > wizofoz2k_at_yahoo.com.au.nospam said...
> > > Following up on DA Morgan, 09 Apr 2003:
> > >
> > > > Where are the good old days where we got paid by the number of lines
> of
> > > > code?
> > > >
> > >
> > > Hah! Can you imagine? A simple J2EE app
> > > with three or four screens is worth about
> > > 4Mb of COMPRESSED jar file. Man, that would
> > > be worth a *fortune* in Cobol lines!
> > >
> > > Progress....
> > > :)
> > >
> > A long time ago I worked for the government and one of our contractors
> > touted their productivity in lines of code in Forms 3 .inp files ... and
> > claimed they were some kind of supercoders ... well ahead of the
> > national average in producing "flawless" code.
> >
> > Same with MS Visual C++ MFC ... lots of code and all you've got is an
> > SDI or MDI window with nothing in it.
> >
> > Where will we store software distribution files when they no longer fit
> > on a DVD?
> > --
>
> Amen.
>
> And when will some revolutionary Project Manager or Development Manager
> reward those who find a working solution with the *fewest* lines of code?
>
> Simple, common sense idea, around for at least 20 years, but they're still
> at it; writing reams. Maybe the idea is to future-proof the developers,
> since the code produced is too cumbersome, long-winded and verbose to be
> handed over to anyone else to maintain, so they have an indefinite
contract.
>
> Or is that too cynical an attitude? Maybe Jim K is right; I'm too old.
>
> But why don't we just do things *right*? Then the customers would *want*
us
> back, rather than just *needing* us back to fix what we broke before.
>
> Rant, sorry.
>
> Regards,
> Paul
>
>
>
Received on Wed Apr 09 2003 - 20:16:26 CDT
