Hi, On Sat, Aug 12, 2006 at 06:53:26PM -0400, Luis Araujo wrote:
> As a sidenote, briefly referring to John Ousterhout , when he talks > about scripting programming: > > "They give up execution speed and strength of typing relative to > system programming languages but provide significantly higher > programmer productivity and software reuse." I don't buy the productivity arguement in general. Sure, this is very important in areas where you have to come up with code as fast as possible, like prototyping and scripts. And in these areas, higher-level languages are very popular indeed. When it comes to more serious programming however, you spend *lots* more time thinking about functionality/interfaces, program structure, algorithms, than with actual coding. When I'm working on larger applications, the time I spend actually writing code (and debugging C-specific problems) is just a few per cent of the total time I spend on it. I doubt in such a situation the small gain from using a different language would even justify the time needed to learn it... In many areas, the possible productivity gains just don't outweigh the higher entry costs and other disadvantages -- and I'm pretty certain OS implementation (not prototyping) is one of them. -antrik- _______________________________________________ L4-hurd mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/l4-hurd
