Re: Randall is just talking out his arse again...
- From: The_Sage <The_Sage@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2005 22:20:33 -0700
>Reply to article by: "¬a\\/b" <al@xxx>
>Date written: Sat, 13 Aug 2005 09:27:31 GMT
>MsgID:<4ifrf1h9tusfud7qsb1rstbodu4ubkl895@xxxxxxx>
>>Activity Case A Case B Difference
>> Assembler Fortran
>> (10,000 Lines) (3,000 Lines)
>>Requirement 2 Months 2 Months 0
>>Design 3 Months 3 Months 0
>>Coding 10 Months 3 Months -7
>>Integration/Test 5 Months 3 Months -2
>>User Documentation 2 Months 2 Months 0
>>Management/Support 3 Months 2 Months -1
>>Total 25 Months 15 Months -10
>>Total Costs $125,000 $75,000 ($50,000)
>>Cost/Src Line $12.50 $25.00 $12.50
>>Lines/Person/Month 400 200 -200
>>Cost Per FP $4,166.67 $2,500.00 ($1,666.67)
>>FP/Person/Month 1.2 2 +0.8
>>If you want to write an average of 1 line of ASM for every 2 lines you could
>>write in FORTRAN, if you want to write 1.2 functions in ASM for every 2
>>functions you could write in FORTRAN, if you would rather run a business where
>>you lose $.67 for every line of code you write as compared to FORTRAN, and if
>>you would rather spend 1.67 days writing the same amount of final code you could
>>have written in FORTRAN in 1.0 days, then be my guest, but while you will still
>>be writing and debugging your program, I will be done with mine and almost
>>finished with a second project. Yeah, you are really at the forefront of
>>technology with your claims of the superiority of ASM.
>There is something that i don't understand until now: why assembly has
>no need of libraryes?
The ASM language could use some libraries, but the problem is:
1) By definition ASM is a reflection of the processor hardware and is used as
such, and libraries do not reflect the processor hardware but the operating
system
2) No one could ever agree on a standardized ASM library. ASM could have used
ANSI C libraries but if you had to buy ANSI C to use them, why use ASM when you
could use the far superior HLL instead?
>Is it possible that this cost depends because they (assembly
>programmers) have to write every time all by scratch?
The cost depends on complexity of code and ASM is more complex than FORTRAN or
C. As anyone but "real programmers" (http://dict.die.net/real%20programmer/)
realize, say like Randall for example, "Assembler is generally no longer
considered interesting or appropriate for anything but HLL implementation, glue,
and a few time-critical and hardware-specific uses in systems programs"
(http://dict.die.net/languages%20of%20choice/).
Even more important is the fact that, unlike the majority of HLLs, ASM lacks
independance from a particular computer hardware architecture, lacks
standardization of libraries, fails to work with abstractions, lacks support for
reliability or safety, fails to keep up with computer technology, lacks
appropriate engineering-based support tools and environments, lacks clarity in
the source code, lacks complexity management, lacks straightfoward and user
friendly concurrency support, lacks distributed system support, has poor
maintainability, lacks true object-oriented programming support, lacks
portability, etc, etc, etc.
The point of a programming language to make it simple to transfer thoughts
from an idea to a program. People do not think naturally in ASM and languages
that use unnatural terms and syntax are not productive...duh!
>some time i see the NG: muc.lists.bugtraq
>do you know how many error they find?
ASM is very conducive to creating bugs, hence the reason is was abadonded years
ago as a primary language by all except the very ignorant and the very
stupid...say Randall for example.
>Did you have forgot the costs for find error and correct them?
No, it is called "debugging".
The Sage
=============================================================
My Home Page : http://members.cox.net/the.sage
"Toward no crimes have men shown themselves so cold-bloodedly
cruel as in punishing differences in belief"
-- James Russell Lowell
=============================================================
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Randall is just talking out his arse again...
- From: ¬a\\/b
- Re: Randall is just talking out his arse again...
- References:
- Randall is just talking out his arse again...
- From: The_Sage
- Re: Randall is just talking out his arse again...
- From: ¬a\\/b
- Randall is just talking out his arse again...
- Prev by Date: Re: What are your applications?
- Next by Date: Re: model of Z
- Previous by thread: Re: Randall is just talking out his arse again...
- Next by thread: Re: Randall is just talking out his arse again...
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
