3 ms·
>In four months Barnaby wrote 137,000 lines of bullet-proof assembly language code. Rubenstein later checked with some friends from IBM who calculated Barnaby’s
by pitchups 10y ago
>In four months Barnaby wrote 137,000 lines of bullet-proof assembly language code. Rubenstein later checked with some friends from IBM who calculated Barnaby’s output as 42-man years.*
That effectively makes Barnaby 42*3 or 126 times more productive than a normal programmer!
- skizm 10y agoIF HR departments find this out, they will now stop looking for 10x programmers and start looking for 126x programmers.
- _pmf_ 10y agoToo bad most HR people are 0.003x recruiters and at maximum 0.9x standard form emailers, otherwise they might actually find what they're looking for.
- njharman 10y ago126 times an IBM programmer. Which I'm not going to assume is or was a normal programmer.
- Roboprog 10y agoI don't know. I suspect it would be a pretty safe bet that an IBM programmer would be within a standard deviation of mean productivity output: any less, and they would be culled; any more, and they would leave. +/- 1 sigma covers 2/3 of the population or so, right?
- criddell 10y agoI wrote in assembly for a while and the best that I could say was that I eventually could write something in assembly roughly as fast as I could in C. The key for me was building up my personal library of macros. Because of this, I wouldn't be productive working on your code and (unless you are Barnaby-level) I doubt you would immediately pick up on what I wrote.