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=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Xref: utzoo comp.object:2783 comp.lang.ada:5014
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!igor!rutabaga!jls
From: jls@rutabaga.Rational.COM (Jim Showalter)
Newsgroups: comp.object,comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: ada-c++ productivity
Keywords: Looking for a few lazy men
Message-ID: <jls.669417447@rutabaga>
Date: 19 Mar 91 21:17:27 GMT
References: <1991Mar15.224626.27077@aero.org> <1991Mar16.000624.2513@leland.Stanford.EDU> <1991Mar16.205228.4268@grebyn.com> <1991Mar17.142756.25676@ecst.csuchico.edu> <1991Mar18.231721.2082@sctc.com>
Sender: news@Rational.COM
Followup-To: comp.object
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Nice post! To your list of things that reduce productivity, I'd add:

-- Requirements never change in midstream

-- I'm not required to conform to 2167/A

In my experience--which seems to mirror yours--often the claims made
for SLOC/day turn out to be not so much for debugged, documented,
tested, fielded code, but for error-ridden trash that winds up as
shelfware.

In short, most SLOC/day rates are really just a measure of some hacker's
TYPING SPEED.
--
***** DISCLAIMER: The opinions expressed herein are my own. Duh. Like you'd
ever be able to find a company (or, for that matter, very many people) with
opinions like mine. 
              -- "When I want your opinion, I'll read it in your entrails."