TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy

TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Content-type:
TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Sender:
"Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Date:
Fri, 16 Jun 2000 09:35:20 +0000
In-Reply-To:
MIME-version:
1.0
Reply-To:
Parts/Attachments:
TEXT/PLAIN (21 lines)
Jeff

>I misquoted the units for code development. Industry standard figures
>are 10 SLOC/person-day (not per person-hour). Doubling this gives 7000
>person-days (not person-hours). Luckily, I was thinking person-days even
>as I typed person-hours, so the figure of "about 30 person-years" is
>still correct.

I didn't want to mention it, but seeing as you brough it up, I imagine this
quote from your original message is also a typo:

>A more realistic estimate, using 10 kSLOC/day and 5 errors/kSLOC, is $1.8M over
>6 years to increase the number of errors by at least a factor of 10.

I can't say I know of anyone who has ever written 10kSLOC/day :-)

Apart from that, it was certainly a well presented argument in favour of
retaining Ada.

John

ATOM RSS1 RSS2