On Sunday, 7 December 2014 at 23:22:21 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Sun, Dec 07, 2014 at 04:58:23PM +0000, via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
On Sunday, 7 December 2014 at 16:08:27 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d
wrote:
>Hahaha... you're right, I'm not thinking straight. OK, so
>it's 40*50
>= 200 man-hours per week. Hmph... I'm about two orders of
>magnitude
>off.
log10(40/8) = 0.6989700043360189 orders of magnitude…
Yes, and now I get to hang 0.3948500216800940239 of my head in
shame
instead.
T
What I gather from all the posts about code reviews and testing
is that it's a solid mess out there, and the bigger the company
the bigger the mess. I'm pretty much the only guy who works on
the code at the moment and sometimes feel a bit bad about failing
to update this or that (unit) test (simply because I lack the
time). On the other hand the code and the programs are constantly
being tested in the real world and are very stable.
This might be due to the fact, that I "unit test" a lot during
development (code a little, test a little). It is also down to
the fact that the D compiler often helps me and warns me
immediately. It's not so easy to get away with dodgy code in D.
Regarding the working hours, it is hard to measure efficiency in
working hours when it comes to software development. Sometimes a
major improvement takes only one or two hours of highly
concentrated work (after which the brain is wrecked). Sometimes a
stupid little problem takes a whole day to sort out. And let's
not forget that programmers often tend to think about how to
solve a certain problem after work. I often found it more
efficient to shut down the computer and go home than to keep on
trying to find a bug when I'm already tired and annoyed. The next
morning (with a fresh head) I often spot the bug immediately. Or
I think of the right solution on my way home. Mere working hours
don't count.
