3 ms·

I would say that 8 years to write 60k LOC is slow. I worked as the sole GUI software engineer for a hardware firm and wrote > 100K LOC in 3 years, not including

I would say that 8 years to write 60k LOC is slow. I worked as the sole GUI software engineer for a hardware firm and wrote > 100K LOC in 3 years, not including the test projects proceeding the actual real project. This was in C++, and included client/server stuff, entirely custom resizeable GUI, OpenGL 3D graphics and modelling of 3D assets and textures etc too. And getting it running under OSX + Win32, fixing issues on both. And that wasn't a stressful place to work with insane deadlines - it was fairly relaxed for the most part.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
gizmo 10y ago
You can't compare C++ with Ruby code. Rails code especially can very easily become a hairball where everything happens "somewhere else". You don't have static type checking or other compile time hints to figure out what is going on. You can't see which functions are called from which call sites. Refactoring tools? Forget it. Ruby is a very compact and flexible language, but if you're not disciplined you'll pay the price for it. A 60kloc C++ project is small and easily manageable, a 60kloc Ruby hairball can drive a person insane.
RangerScience 10y ago
Rails code. You get a lot of bang for your buck. That, and the "greater" metric for the project complexity is the stupidly high number of controllers and models.
golergka 10y ago
LOC differ not only by the language or technical difficulty of the task, but by business requirement difficulty as well. If, for example, they're in banking and finance, and those LOC deal with fine details of tax code... Oh boy.
wheaties 10y ago
As a former C++ dev, you can't compare Ruby LOC to C++ LOC. Just 4x the Ruby and then it becomes more fair. C++ is just verbose. #import <algorithm.h> doesn't fix everything blocks fix.
PaulRobinson 10y ago
This is why LOC is a terrible metric. I was using it as a barometer as most ruby devs would see 60k LOC and go "Ooooookaaaay...." If anything, we've gone too fast and not spent enough time going back and understanding what we really need to keep.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

gizmo 10y ago

You can't compare C++ with Ruby code. Rails code especially can very easily become a hairball where everything happens "somewhere else". You don't have static type checking or other compile time hints to figure out what is going on. You can't see which functions are called from which call sites. Refactoring tools? Forget it. Ruby is a very compact and flexible language, but if you're not disciplined you'll pay the price for it. A 60kloc C++ project is small and easily manageable, a 60kloc Ruby hairball can drive a person insane.

RangerScience 10y ago

Rails code. You get a lot of bang for your buck. That, and the "greater" metric for the project complexity is the stupidly high number of controllers and models.

golergka 10y ago

LOC differ not only by the language or technical difficulty of the task, but by business requirement difficulty as well. If, for example, they're in banking and finance, and those LOC deal with fine details of tax code... Oh boy.

wheaties 10y ago

As a former C++ dev, you can't compare Ruby LOC to C++ LOC. Just 4x the Ruby and then it becomes more fair. C++ is just verbose. #import <algorithm.h> doesn't fix everything blocks fix.

PaulRobinson 10y ago

This is why LOC is a terrible metric. I was using it as a barometer as most ruby devs would see 60k LOC and go "Ooooookaaaay...." If anything, we've gone too fast and not spent enough time going back and understanding what we really need to keep.