From: Isaac Gouy Date: 2005-09-23T11:11:41+09:00 Subject: Re: Large Ruby Apps ? Rick Nooner wrote: > On Fri, Sep 23, 2005 at 08:41:40AM +0900, Isaac Gouy wrote: > > Rick Nooner wrote: > > > On Fri, Sep 23, 2005 at 06:26:39AM +0900, Isaac Gouy wrote: > > > > Rick Nooner wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Oh, and I've been writing large C systems since the mid 80's. > > > > > > > > Have you been writing large C++ / Java systems long enough to support > > > > the claim of 10x size difference? Do you have any data, or is 10x a > > > > nice sounding guess? > > > > > > Hmmm... I think I said that I've been doing this for a long time. > > > > You said you'd been doing C for a long time - you didn't say you'd been > > doing Java and C++ for a long time. > > C++ since the early 90's. Java since '96. Python since '95. Ruby since > '03. I've used many other languages through the years as well. I don't > have a problem choosing the right language for the job at hand. Ruby > is by no means the only language that I use regularly. > > > > > > Just in > > > case you are wondering, I have written realtime systems in both the Nuclear > > > Power industry and more recently in telecommunications. I've also spent > > > time in the video game industry (but that really was a long time ago and was > > > all in assembly.) Interestingly enough, the arguments were pretty much the > > > same when discussing the move from assembly to C (and fortran to C). In fact, > > > looking back to the early 70's, there is a series of computer science text > > > books by McGraw Hill that discusses the transition from doing systems > > > programming in assembly vs PL/1 that uses almost identical arguments that > > > we use today about "scripting" lanaguages. I'll have to get the name of the > > > book when I get home tonight. > > > > > > Interestingly enough, these arguments were were formulated based on my > > > observations over the past two decades independently of those in this book > > > which I only found in the last couple of weeks. Others have made the same > > > observations, also indepenently. Has there been a formal study? Not that > > > I know of. I can only speak from my own experience. YMMV. > > > > So 10x is a nice sounding guess. > > It's an educated guess, but it is a guess. I've been making educated guesses > about development for my whole career. In fact, it's expected to even get > a project approved. > > I don't have the time or the inclination to do an actual double blind study. > If this doesn't suit your expectations, do things your way and I'll do them > my way. In the end, it doesn't matter what either you or I do to anyone > but those we work for (and our own peace of mind). > > > > > > > > > > Are you doing the same kind of task in Ruby that you did with > > > > C/C++/Java? > > > > > > In the telecommunications world, yes. In fact, with some systems, it was > > > quicker and easier to reimplement them in Ruby, adding new features in > > > the process than to just add the new features in the original languages. > > > > Did you do both? Did you re-implement the systems in Ruby, and > > implement the new features in the original languages? If not, aren't we > > simply assuming it was quicker and easier. > > You don't have to implement in both languages to know which would be easier. > That's what experience in both languages gives you. That doesn't mean you > have to take my word for it. You can actually try yourself and see :-) > I'm not going to do the dirty work trying to convince you. > > I'm also not saying that Ruby is the only language that should be used > for any given project. Use the right tool for the job. Experience teachs > this quite well. > > > None of this has anything to do with whether it's more productive to > > use a high-level language with an appropriate framework, rather than > > using a systems programming language - it has a lot to do with > > separating data from assumption. > > My experience says differently - YMMV. If you have the time to do > a research project on this, by all means do so... I have real work to > do. Even with all those years of experience, the only alternatives to a guesses (educated or otherwise) are double-blind studies and research projects? Well, "real work" might also include measuring what we do and how long it took to do it - then we don't have to guess. > > I've said all that I'm going to say on this subject for the moment. > Believe what you will. 5x :-) > > Rick > > -- > Rick Nooner > rick@nooner.net > http://www.nooner.net