On Thu, 8 Mar 2001 17:15:54 -0800 (PST), Robin Jeffries
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have a coleague working in the area of CAD, who is interested in
> what kind of difference it would make if a CAD run took 2 hours, or 15
> minutes, instead of the current 8-12 hours. He thought (and I agree)
> that there ought to be a parallel to how long it takes to compile a
> program. They are in the equivalent of the era where we submitted a
> card deck and waited a day for turn around.
>
> Does anyone know of studies about what changes when compiles
> drastically change the amount of time they take? I vaguely remember
> some data that suggested that people worked very hard to get the
> errors out by hand (even hand simulating the program before they
> submitted it) when turn around was hours, but when the turn around
> improved, they got more sloppy, but I don't know of any other work in
> this area. Any pointers?
You might consider looking for studies covering the difference between
static batch-oriented programming languages (like C++) and dynamic
interactive programming languages (like Common Lisp). However, the studies
are generally aimed at productivity and tend to show large improvements
when using interactive languages. This extends all the way into the live
24-7 applications which can be patched to fix problems while they are still
running. So almost paradoxically interactive environments can lead to more
reliable software.
__Jason
- Automatic footer for [EMAIL PROTECTED] ----------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] unsubscribe discuss
To join the announcements list, mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] subscribe announce
To receive a help file, mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] help
This list is archived at http://www.mail-archive.com/discuss%40ppig.org/
If you have any problems or questions, please mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
