[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
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.
'serious' programming? ... anyway , i think that a design approach goes
very tight with the tools/languages used.
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...
The development process of a specific program can be a factor of 60x
more faster and productive depending upon the language chosen.
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.
That depends upon the model, traditional (or unix-like) OS
implementations probably won't. But for example, Smalltalk-alike systems
for sure it does.
I probably had to point to the link where he addresses many of these
concerns and misunderstandings, http://www.tcl.tk/doc/scripting.html
Sincerely,
Luis
_______________________________________________
L4-hurd mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/l4-hurd
