Em 12/02/2013 13:36, Christopher Schultz escreveu:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
On 2/11/13 4:30 PM, Terence M. Bandoian wrote:
I understand the considerations above and they are a part of the
prevailing thinking. However, one underlying assumption of the
supporting argument appears to be that today's programmers are not
capable of developing maintainable code which I don't believe is
true. As I understand it, programmer productivity is one of the
most significant factors in the decision making process and it is a
valid concern. IF (that's a big if) an application can be developed
in half the time using a generalized solution, then that approach
has to be considered along with a host of other concerns including
the end product and the effect on the organization. I say reliance
on generalized solutions is short-sighted because knowledge of the
underlying technologies is lost, or never gained, along with the
skills to work in those spheres.
Are you suggesting that people who program using Java are oblivious to
the innards of hardware architecture and are remain ignorant of these
important details? That's the logical conclusion to your argument.
I'm not saying you're wrong, but you have to admit that a Java
programmer (of which I'm one) saying that using a generalized solution
makes you ignorant is a bit like the pot calling the kettle black.
Efficiency, flexibility, repairability, extensibility and
reliability are all components of software quality and all are
affected by complexity. Less complex systems are easier to
maintain.
To continue the aside, wasted energy is wasted energy and it may
become a factor in software development at some point. I think
decision makers should be taught that there is more to the bottom
line than dollars and cents.
In my experience, by far the biggest time waster is trying to deal
with code that is (or has become) unmaintainable. Re-writing just
because a piece of code has become out-of-touch with current standards
or because nobody understands how it works is entirely wasted effort.
We have lots of places in our code where we have been spending -
literally - years recording from bad decisions in the past.
Most companies are based on believes of the past: development is costly
and non profitable. While this is true for small companies (where each
employee salary present a risk for the profitability), for medium to big
companies this is not true anymore.
The cost for constraining the company to software produced by big
players (I wont cite names) is much bigger than having a (well
organized) development team capable of integrating standards (like
accounting and taxes) to the wild (sales, production, research).
Using libraries like JPA cannot be considered a danger unless used
without proper analysis. This is true for everything in life (even water
consumed in excess cause damage to health).
I do use JPA in the development of high performance applications, and I
do sacrifice some nanoseconds in prol of well maintainable code - for
the user, anything below 200ms will look instantaneous.
This makes my company profitable where my customers failed when working
in house.
I hope they never learn how to do that, because this guarantees my money
at the end of each month.
Edson Richter
- -chris
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.17 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
iEYEAREIAAYFAlEaYWUACgkQ9CaO5/Lv0PC0CQCfX91lU8Tbik1CDe3g8ASV6pxQ
rOkAn2PPdBNrP4rVPRJ6GWzXqFx/8HyQ
=hcps
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org
