No, I haven't done the actual analysis, I'm just speaking from my impressions based on my experience on both sides of the coin. I would agree that if you're comparing this to C programs, there's a very wide gap, and Remedy will win. However, there are now several nice frameworks available that make building applications, including database applications, much easier and quicker, and that, I believe, narrow that gap and may even invert it in some cases, depending on what you are trying to do. For example, the .NET framework and associated tools keep getting better and can make writing applications quite quick and easy. It, too, will translate much of your design to code for you, leaving you to implement things like event handlers and your business logic, which is essentially what Remedy leaves you, too. You're also left designing your own database, for the most part, but they include tools to help with that as well.
My recent experience has been that I have been able to put together usable application GUIs quicker in .NET than I have in Remedy. The database portion of that takes longer (primarily because it doesn't happen as a byproduct of creating a form). The logic portion depends on the complexity of the logic and what is being done. If you want to have an N-tier architecture, then it does get more complicated, as that is already provided for you with Remedy. Again, no hard numbers, just impressions, but I would be surprised if your numbers came out anywhere near what you got for C programs if you did it again with more modern application building frameworks and tools. I would also think that the numbers would change depending on what you're trying to implement including aspects of user interaction and logic within the application, as well as the size of the application you are developing. My personal experience has been that it has been easier for me to test and maintain complex but well written programs in C++ or .NET than it has been to do the same with things like the ITSM applications, primarily due to the way the Remedy environment was designed and the tools that I have available to me for the other environments. Then again, it may also have a bit to do with my relative levels of experience in the different domains... I don't mean to try to invalidate your points about FPA when comparing Remedy to code, I think they're valid. I just had a hard time with the 6 orders of magnitude difference. I think the results will be different depending on what you're comparing Remedy development to. Lyle From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Meyer, Jennifer L Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 1:17 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Using FPA ( Function Point Analysis ) with Remedy ARS ** I understand your point, Lyle, but have you used a function point analysis to make that comparison, or are you just making a rough estimate? The industry standard for a user writing traditional code is 10 lines of usable, functional, tested code per day. That doesn't include comments, time for testing, or re-writes. That's just the finished product. Because Remedy provides us with a graphical interface with which to perform our work and the AR System engine translates our work into C for us, we are saved a tremendous amount of effort versus the amount of effort required to write similar applications directly in C. I received the "6 orders of magnitude" estimate using FPA by comparing Remedy to writing the actual code in C. If I recall correctly, it came out to a 2 million to 1 ratio. Programmers writing with code have to run their code through multiple environments, perform multiple levels of testing, integrate code with existing products, and perform regression testing. Remedy is nothing special, it's just easier. Jennifer Meyer ________________________________ From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Lyle Taylor Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 12:10 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Possibly spam: Using FPA ( Function Point Analysis ) with Remedy ARS "Remedy is the equivalent of a 5th-generation programming language, allowing Remedy developers to develop far faster than coders write. We're talking around 6 orders of magnitude." That's not my experience. Simple development and prototyping can be very fast in Remedy. Significant development with complex applications with "good" user interaction is difficult and time consuming in Remedy and seems to get exponentially more difficult to manage and maintain the larger and more complex the application gets. I would not even say that Remedy is an order of magnitude faster (10 times faster) than traditional development even for simple applications, let alone 6 orders of magnitude. For some things it can be much faster, but it depends entirely on what you're trying to accomplish and the level of refinement you're trying to achieve when it comes to user interaction. Lyle From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Meyer, Jennifer L Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 7:57 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Possibly spam: Using FPA ( Function Point Analysis ) with Remedy ARS ** I was on an effort many years ago that used FPA to establish construction and maintenance of our internal system while we were moving to CMM level 3. We carried out a successful effort and integrated our efforts into a Remedy application for future project tracking and future estimates. You will need to know the following to move forward successfully: Since Remedy is a WYSIWYG programming tool, you cannot compare it directly to line-coded programming languages. Remedy is the equivalent of a 5th-generation programming language, allowing Remedy developers to develop far faster than coders write. We're talking around 6 orders of magnitude. You can compare Remedy to Remedy, but you can't compare Remedy to COBOL. FPA falls apart for a meaningful analysis between languages. Line-coded languages are very comment-intensive. Remedy doesn't provide a meaningful method to include comments with workflow. This, too, will skew your FPA between languages, since you will have to perform your documentation via some external method. Our team broke down workflow by relative complexity assigning a weight to each type of workflow and using the included number of actions and difficulty of the qualification to arrive at the total complexity of each piece of workflow. In this way, we were able to track each project by total pieces of workflow generated, tested, and implemented, using those numbers for future projects and extrapolating them to dollars and cents. Looking back, I still think it was an excellent system. Please let me know how your team decides to perform your analysis. Best of luck attaining CMMI level 3. I've always enjoyed working with CMMI. Regards, Jennifer Meyer Remedy Technical Support Specialist State of North Carolina Office Of Information Technology Services Service Delivery Division ITSM & ITAM Services Office: 919-754-6543 ITS Service Desk: 919-754-6000 jennifer.me...@its.nc.gov<mailto:jennifer.me...@its.nc.gov> http://its.state.nc.us E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties only by an authorized State Official. ________________________________ From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Mario Roberto Porto Fº Sent: Sunday, May 10, 2009 9:02 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Possibly spam: Using FPA ( Function Point Analysis ) with Remedy ARS Hi there In my company we decided to use FPA ( Function Point Analisys ) as the standart to estimate construction and maintenance of our internal system ( We are also in proccess of establish CMMI level 2-3 ) Id like to know if someone already had the expirence of counting FPA for ARS development. If so, what are the points of attention, results, its ok or not. Thanks a lot Mario Roberto Sao Paulo - Brazil _Platinum Sponsor: rmisoluti...@verizon.net ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"__Platinum Sponsor: rmisoluti...@verizon.net ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. _Platinum Sponsor: rmisoluti...@verizon.net ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"__Platinum Sponsor: rmisoluti...@verizon.net ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor:rmisoluti...@verizon.net ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
