On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 3:40 AM, lkfken <alpha.azieru / gmail.com> wrote:
>> Interesting tidbit: research has shown that developers have roughly
>> the same productivity in lines of code per day _independently of
>> programming language_.     
>> preproduced code at your hands (either in libraries, interpreters or
>> compilers) your overall performance increases.
>
> Thank you.
> My English is not very good.    > saying that productivity has not direct relationship to the
> programming language?

IIRC the statement was that independent from programming language the
number produced lines of code per day that were error free is roughly
identical.  So this was not only about the writing itself but also
about ensuring quality.

> Based from your comment, I did a little research.
>
> http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2005/08/are-all-programming-languages-the-same.html
>
> Will you please point me to the source of your comment?

Unfortunately I don't have a URL handy.  Candidate sources are
http://www.amazon.com/dp/3540520392
http://www.amazon.com/dp/0201835959
http://www.amazon.com/dp/0932633439

But the source may be a totally different one.  It's been a while that
I found that bit.

> Anyhow, I was not talking about productivity.     > measuring the web framework in "number of lines" in 2 different
> languages is almost pointless...esp. when it is used as a reference on
> performance.

And I absolutely agreed (and agree).  I was digression because I found
that bit interesting and thought others would, too.

>> I am not sure this analysis is correct: typically, if you have a
>> library with a good implementation efforts have gone into it to
>> provide a good interface and to optimize it.
>
> You are right.    Ю      
> write EVERY routines myself in order for my script to work.

Exactly.  And that does not only save you writing effort but testing
effort (and probably documentation effort) as well.

> But what if it is an mission-critical scenario?  > shouldn't use Ruby to begin with.

And you would base that decision on what?

> Second, if I have to use Ruby, in
> order to gain back few extra cycles, I might need to write my own
> extension in C instead of using "standard libraries".
>
> I am already way off the original topic.  
Drifting off topic can reveal interesting insights and produce
discussions which lead to new knowledge. :-)

Kind regards

robert


-- 
remember.guy do |as, often| as.you_can - without end
http://blog.rubybestpractices.com/