Re: Expected bytes per sloc (semicolons) performance

[default <joel_seidman.NOESPAME@yahoo.com>]

Stephen Leake wrote:
> 
> default <joel_seidman.NOESPAME@yahoo.com> writes:
> 
> > Mats Weber wrote:
> > >
> > > >Rules about n bytes per sloc are just too processor, compiler, and
> > > >coding style dependent to be useful.
> > >
> > > I would put a big emphasis on coding style here. If you use a lot of
> > > generics, the code will be generated once for each instance in most
> > > implementations.
> >
> > I agree there is a relation between coding style and bytes/sloc.
> >
> > But I don't understand the specific denigration of generics, which I've
> > heard occasionally. It seems to me the alternative to generics is
> > nearly-duplicate packages and procedures, usually created by brute-force
> > cut-and-paste in a text editor. You end up with the same amount of
> > object code, but with the disadvantage that it is harder to maintain
> > than if you had used generics.
> >
> > Is there a flaw in my reasoning?
> 
> I didn't get a "denigration of generics" from this. Mats is merely
> pointing out that a style that uses generics will have a _much_ higher
> number for bytes/sloc than a style that doesn't. This is neither bad
> nor good; it's just a fact. It does argue that "bytes/sloc" is not a
> useful measure.

OK, Stephe, I may have misread the intention. I've heard it stated as a
complaint in the past, so I jumped to a conclusion. My apologies to
Mats. 
-- Joel