Re: languages

[Luis Araujo]

address@hidden 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