Re: OO-Inquisition


Alvin Ryder wrote:
On Apr 19, 10:49 pm, Thomas Gagne <tga...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Alvin Ryder wrote:
<snip>

I've witnessed the work of hundreds of OO developers, the state of
affairs isn't exactly pretty.

20 years ago, the same was true of C and FORTRAN. I worked with a staff
of 50 programmers, fewer than 10 of which were excellent, which for most
staffs is above average.

That said, given any sampling of programmers, only have of them will be
better than average. Programming isn't math or baking. Programmers
can't just follow recipes and come up with good programs, or understand
how to wield paradigms to the greatest affect. It matters little
whether its procedural, OO, or relational.

So it's unfair to measure a language's or paradigm's effectiveness by
measuring how 90% of programmers use it. To realize what really can be
done we should look at how the top 10% of programmers are able to bend
any language, paradigm, or idiom to their will and learn from that.

I think it does count at least *some* against the language/technology
if it is hard to get right.


Actually that 90% is bit of a hobby horse of mine. When I began my
career I started getting the feeling that 90% of programmers weren't
worthy hiring whatsoever. It wasn't the technology, the rage back then
was "procedural / relational" and cobol it was just them. They were
simply sloppy operators.

COBOL and relational have never been "in style" at the same time. The
first commercial relational product didn't even exist until the late
1970's and didn't become mainstream until a few years later, and by
that time COBOL was already starting to look old. Pascal and C were
far more "in".


I began wondering, then actively observing other fields, I came to the
same conclusion about teachers, mechanics, managers ... even doctors!
It wasn't just my imagination I've worked with some of the best
managers and doctors around, they reckoned the same thing.

Everybody wants "A" workers/services at "C" prices. No news there.


So yes, I agree with you.

Cheers ;-)

-T-

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OO-Inquisition
    ... of 50 programmers, fewer than 10 of which were excellent, which for most ... COBOL and relational have never been "in style" at the same time. ... managers and doctors around, ... problem in 3 slices and have 3 doctors do a slice to see which slice ...
    (comp.object)
  • Re: OT: Customer Service Horror Stories
    ... I was the Director of Technology for a small firm (28 employees) and ... managed a small staff of programmers. ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: OO-Inquisition
    ... of 50 programmers, fewer than 10 of which were excellent, which for most ... COBOL and relational have never been "in style" at the same time. ... managers and doctors around, ...
    (comp.object)
  • Re: [OT] As Was Done With Training, Perhaps
    ... Better to invest the money in their staff, value their staff (and be seen to ... Managers know they will need more managers - managers don't know that ... So train CoBOL programmers to become ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)
  • Re: Java Batch und JCL (DSN Disposition)
    ... Using the same staff of programmers that wrote the COBOL code? ... that long time COBOL programmers can't learn Java. ...
    (bit.listserv.ibm-main)