From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.freenet.ag!takemy.news.telefonica.de!telefonica.de!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool3.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 16:33:23 +0200 From: "G.B." User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Web Development Using Ada? References: <874bf843-8212-44a4-b0c6-e20d831325bc@googlegroups.com> <51f8cb0a$0$99959$afc38c87@news6.united-newsserver.de> <51f8f54e$0$6561$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-ID: <51f92033$0$6563$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net> Organization: Arcor NNTP-Posting-Date: 31 Jul 2013 16:33:23 CEST NNTP-Posting-Host: 0428cd0a.newsspool4.arcor-online.net X-Trace: DXC=fnD89gbMieaf1oJaJ0@dmg4IUKjLh>_cHTX3jm\aTb94[TFEe X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:16618 Date: 2013-07-31T16:33:23+02:00 List-Id: On 31.07.13 13:44, Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57) wrote: > Le Wed, 31 Jul 2013 13:30:23 +0200, G.B. > a écrit: >> the difficulty of either effort will be >> influenced by the prior project's use of standard techniques as >> opposed to standard "technologies" > > Please, can you tell more on this? In part, Michael Erdmann explains. Moreover, the web market is prone to errors of adopting "new technologies" early, falling prey to the persuasive rhetoric of marketing: "It's easy!", "Latest technology", etc. The market is considered a race, and some think that the first one always wins. Thus, "the market" spreads venture capital among the "new technology things" per year and per start-up, in order to see which one survives. That's very different from a standards based solution approach. To produce true standard *solutions*, one will---at least in an ideal world---start from experience, think first, then try, then iterate. That's the same with standard techniques: there is a lot to learn, like how to organize active and passive components of a system, how to layer the parts of a system, how to prepare for enlarging the system's capacities, how to make the system adaptable, how to integrate the system with accounting, etc. There is not hot, now framework for that I know of, is there? Working with standards takes time. Before that, it takes time learning something comprehensive as a standard. Rewards come only later. Pseudo-solutions ("technologies") will be rewarding immediately, as they offer something very simple for some very simple problems, and you can show something! Guess how many simple problems are in need of solutions, I mean technically simple problems, not simple use cases such as online micro-payment (still largely unsolved). How many of these are viable, economically? Standards tend to be less simplistic, therefore less appealing than the latest, easy to operate "technological achievement": think of a web based framework that generates views of database tables. Oh, it ignores, for now, the relational part of RDBMSs, but, bla bla bla marketing bla bla bla(*). Since maintenance-friendly use of well understood techniques takes time (for learning and doing), produce cannot become part of a documented software system in no time, to be pushed out the door into the market AQAP. But! Once you have a system that was programmed drawing on tech knowledge collected during the last decades, you will see managers smile when they witness a system not failing in the event of data loss, or a system being adapted to some new use case in one and a half day, using standard programming techniques! (**) That's when a team had been using standard techniques as opposed to standard (***) "technologies". __ (*) Somewhat related: Hibernate is becoming an obstacle here and there, as do hash based databases of data that turn out to be relational in the end. Going back to standard relational software, and to more boring, standard, old technique such as JDBC. Oops. (**) Standard programming techniques would include "patterns", a preference for has-a, independent modules, planning for parallel/concurrent execution, defensive I/O, etc. (***) *standard* n. what everyone is currently in favor of, a must.