TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy


Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
"Marc A. Criley" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Marc A. Criley
Tue, 13 Oct 1998 09:59:43 -0400
text/plain (45 lines)
I've had that letter to the editor posted outside my office for several
days now, should've mentioned it here.  Thanks Karl!  BTW, the URL for
CrossTalk is:
The letter itself is at

Marc A. Criley
Chief Software Architect
Lockheed Martin ATWCS
[log in to unmask]
Phone: (610) 354-7861
Fax  : (610) 354-7308


Karl A. Nyberg wrote:
> >From the Letter to the Editor, Crosstalk: The Journal of Defense Software
> Engineering, October 1998:
>         ...
>         In an article aimed at metrics novices, it is very important to
>         point out some of th eknown hazards of software metrics.  The fact
>         that lines of code can't be used to measure economic p roductivity
>         is definitely a known hazard that should be stressed.
>         In a comparative study of 10 version of the same period using 10
>         different programming languages (Ada 83, Ada95, C, C++, Objective C,
>         PL/I, Assembler, CHILL, Pascal and Smalltalk), the lines of code
>         metric failed to show either the highest productivity or best
>         quality.  Overall the lowest cost and fewest defects were found in
>         Smalltalk and Ada95, but the lines of code metric favored
>         assembler.  Function points correctly identified Smalltalk and Ada95
>         as being superior, but lines of code failed to do this.
>         Capers Jones
>         Software Productivity Reserach
> OK, guys - spin it!
> -- Karl --