On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 04:17:48PM -0700, David Barbour wrote: > On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 1:44 PM, Gath-Gealaich > In real systems, 90% of code (conservatively) is glue code.
Does this *have* to be the case? Real systems also use C++ (or Java). Better languages may require less glue, (even if they require just as much core logic). Also, much of the need for glue is caused by unnecessary impedance mismatch in the first place. If everyone in the project would use this *or* that, we wouldn't have to translate from this *to* that. > It should come as no surprise that 'scaling' beyond toy projects is > often difficult when our infrastructure is 90% low-grade glue. I'd say the way we talk about "toy projects" is part of the problem. See, what is the single most important metric that come to mind when separatying "toy" projects from "serious" ones? Size. By that definition, OMeta and Maru are mere little toys. If they mature correctly, they may even look *more* toyish. If we want them to *appear* mature however, we'll need to add some bloat. Do we know of projecst that are small in size, but which yields Big Buck$? That should set better examples than mere LOC count. Rebol, maybe? Loup. _______________________________________________ fonc mailing list fonc@vpri.org http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
