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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 114809,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public X-Google-Thread: fac41,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: fjh@mundook.cs.mu.OZ.AU (Fergus Henderson) Subject: Re: OO, C++, and something much better! Date: 1997/01/22 Message-ID: <5c4iel$3k5@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 211414081 references: <32DF458F.4D5C@concentric.net> <32DF94DC.6FF8@watson.ibm.com> <32DFD972.37E4@concentric.net> <5bphq4$5js@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> <32E05FAF.47BA@concentric.net> <5buodl$bci@boursy.news.erols.com> <32E2FEC7.2F7B@concentric.net> <32E40DD8.7B00@netright.com> <32E47ED4.2282@concentric.net> organization: Comp Sci, University of Melbourne newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada,comp.object Date: 1997-01-22T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Alan Lovejoy writes: >David Hanley wrote: >> >> Alan Lovejoy wrote: >> > >> > Smalltalk offers many times faster development times- >> >> Than what? And what is your proof of this? > >Than COBOL, C, C++, Java. [...] >Independent studies that have been done. See, for example, the following: > > . The quoted URL contains a table listing languages and their corresponding "language level". Unfortunately the data in the table is certainly not reliable or reproducible, and indeed perhaps not even meaningful. The explanatory text describes how some of the data was obtained: | Research was done by reading descriptions and genealogies of languages | and making an educated guess as to their levels. Our only consolation is that at least the author admits that "... the margin of error ... can be quite high.". Some of the data is patently ridiculous, and indeed the whole idea that one can measure "language level" on a single scale and hope to get meaningful results is highly suspect. By the way, if you believe that table, then you should quickly switch from Smalltalk to MATHCAD, since that will supposedly increase your productivity by a factor of four. -- Fergus Henderson | "I have always known that the pursuit WWW: | of excellence is a lethal habit" PGP: finger fjh@128.250.37.3 | -- the last words of T. S. Garp.