3 ms·
The takeaway for me was: "The next comparison was my friend who did a compiler on her own in Python and used less than half the code we did because of the power
by bjourne 7y ago
The takeaway for me was: "The next comparison was my friend who did a compiler on her own in Python and used less than half the code we did because of the power of metaprogramming and dynamic types."
So it's the output of ONE Python programmer vs teams of other languages programmers?
- galaxyLogic 7y agoThat is a good point worth emphasizing. It is well-known that teams cause overhead. Think of the Mythical Man-Moth. But in the end the other teams had 3 people that were able to maintain and develop their project further, if needed. The single-person team had only one such person.
- pm90 7y agoBut the Python code was also smaller. Easier to learn and maintain.
- blumomo 7y ago"Smaller code" does not mean easier to understand. It just means less characters to read. Maybe those characters are heavily loaded with meaning, as in the case with meta programing. You might need twice as much time to _understand_ the Python Code vs. the Rust code. The Rust code might be easier to extend, etc. So this is all comes to trade-offs at the end. All this being said, I'm still a huge Python enthusiast.
- gmueckl 7y agoSmaller code may also mean more entangled and more rigid design. But that is hard to tell from just the line count.
- earenndil 7y agoIt was also stated, though, that the reason she worked on her own was that she was a very good programmer; presumably, better than a lot of the people who worked in groups. And, as the sibling mentions, teams introduce overhead.
- p0nce 7y agoIt's pretty clear that (like in every programming teams) the size of the output (in LoC) was linear with the number of programmers, which is something our profession should be worried about.