On Fri, March 28, 2008 2:12 pm, James G. Sack (jim) wrote: > Christopher Smith wrote: >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>> On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 11:56:20AM -0700, James G. Sack (jim) wrote: >>> >>>> Yes, a measurement(definition) of "productivity" is practically >>>> impossible. >>>> >>> >>> I was about to say that but you beat me to it. Incredible! >>> Are we really saying that a manager has no way to determine who is the >>> most >>> productive amongst his coders? I think we'd agree that we can tell >>> between >>> an extrememly bad and an extremely good coder. The problem is >>> distinguishing >>> between 2 faily equally matched coders. >>> >> Yeah, the problem is one of an objective and precise measurement. I >> believe "function points" were supposed to address this. >> > > My understanding is that using function points is a whole lot better > than (say) LOC for estimating (especially) and productivity tracking, > but at the end it's far from perfect because of inherent difficulties of > quantifying software development. Maybe: anything that works only works > well for doing something you already know how to do (and for doing it > the same way)? You might have a different approach to a familiar problem > that finds fewer or more function points but has other tradeoffs. > > Tough stuff, eh? > > > Regards, > ..jim
How long does it take to write a hit song? A symphony? A novel? Hint: actual numbers are all over the place and bear little relationship to the final quality. -- Lan Barnes SCM Analyst Linux Guy Tcl/Tk Enthusiast Biodiesel Brewer -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-lpsg
