From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_40 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1 Date: 28 Jul 93 20:34:26 GMT From: cis.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu! msuinfo!uchinews!att-out!cbnewsl!willett@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (david.c.willett) Subject: Re: Gauntlet gathering rust and dust Message-ID: List-Id: >>From article <1993Jul28.175352.36592@source.asset.com>, by vand@source.asset.c om (Laurence VanDolsen): > In article <1993Jul27.184346.24663@iplmail.orl.mmc.com> jcrigler@theopolis.or l.mmc.com (Jim Crigler) writes: >> >>Agreed that published stats seem cockeyed (listening, Greg? Keep >>listening...), but what % is classified? (That statistic is probably >>classified, too :-) But I have a feeling that it's probably < 25%. >>Anybody got real numbers? > > Although classified projects probably do contribute something, the mix > of languages used in such projects is probably about the same as that > used in non-classified DoD work. It amy even be argued that it is > easier, and therefore more likely, to violate the mandate in a > classified environment. > > What REALLY skews the numbers is that nobody is counting. The vast > majority of the 'statistics' are just estimates. > > "What is your source for that revelation?", he asked. > I think it will (would) be quite difficult to come up with repeatable numbers across a wide variety of programs (projects). I could turn this into a Software Metrics discussion, but I'm going to resist that temptation :^). I will repeat a question I've asked before: Who cares about the raw numbers? It doesn't really matter how many LOC are written in language X or how many software houses use language Y (names obscured to protect the guilty) What matters is "Which language is being used to solve the problems of emerging technologies?". Another important question that presumes an answer to that one is "How well is it doing it?". It will always be the case that the older languages will predominate any "body of use" study. The idea is for programmers to stay ahead of the game by learning the emerging paradyms (emphasis here) ****before**** they emerge. Running to jump on the current fad's bandwagon isn't going to get you very far. Here's a hint: Concentrate on the flaws in the current fad. -- Dave Willett AT&T Federal Systems Advanced Technologies If you want to know --- ASK! -- Linda Ellerbee