3 ms·
> Nowadays, the amount of high-level software written as a ratio of total programmer-hours is probably upwards of 90%. What makes this an appropriate metric? W
by rlpb 9y ago
> Nowadays, the amount of high-level software written as a ratio of total programmer-hours is probably upwards of 90%.
What makes this an appropriate metric? What about, for example, the ratio of total user interaction time?
The lower layers of the stack may not need as much programming attention compared to the top of the stack, but that's only because the stack is top-heavy in terms of programs produced.
But in a given stack, the set of applications at the top of the stack is still not particularly big (most users do not use most applications). On the other hand, everything that users do passes through the lower parts of the stack (most users use the kernel, drivers and the graphics layer constantly, even if indirectly).
- BoiledCabbage 9y agoThe context of 'Matters' in this case is as an important part of the industry. Fortran and Cobol are still extremely heavily used on the servers of many slow moving institutions (banks and the like). Regardless of how many cpu cycles they consume they don't matter in the field of software development. Some low level tech will always be in the stack, but it doesn't mean it's an important part of the field. It will be relegated to a critical yet niche area of programming.