The book I'm currently reading - Software Estimation - comments on the fact that interpretive languages tend to allow programmers to be more productive then compiled - php vs. C# for instance. True??? In my time of writing code, I've found it to be true. You can relax some standards, get quicker feedback and focus on problem solving instead of code creation tasks. I'm sure this will upset many people (or in reality those few who will read this), but that's my gut reaction to the comment in the book. I know there are many arguments regarding whey compiled languages and more rigid development environments produced better quality, more reusable code, etc...but I think both are arguments that need to be substantiated with quantitative research. The simple measurement should be business value. What tools (languages, IDE's, base platforms) provide for the best ratio of benefit to costs, both short and long term. Will we find that interpretive type of environments lend themselves more to short term benefits and more rigid one's to long term benefits? Perhaps....
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment