Re: Preferred implementation language (Re: Meeting agenda robot)

----- "Theodore Tso" wrote:

> So the critical matter is not the richness of the toolset, or the
> number of programmers, or the average performance of the language ---
> if you can find a talented Java programmer, who understands
> performance issues and who isn't afraid to dive into the dozens of
> layers of Eclipse or Java class libraries to understand why some
> application class has become O(n**4) --- or heck, understands what the
> big-O notation means in the first place (you can write fast,
> performant code in any language, just as you can write Fortran in any
> language). No, the key is which language you are most likely to find
> a large pool of good, talented programmers who are willing to
> volunteer for your project; not just now, but also 10-15 years from
> now.
> I'd suggest that the only programming languages likely to meet that
> test are C, Perl, and Python, but what's important is the criteria and
> understanding why that's important.

I do agree with this point. The tool doesn't provide the talent. I'll take a good team writing in a bad language over the reverse any day of the week.

I do take issue with the "richness of the toolset" statement. NIH is a crippling disease and I think leveraging a mature code base gets you more bang for the buck than reinventing the wheel almost every time.

--
Ean Schuessler, CTO Brainfood.com
ean(at)brainfood(dot)com - http://www.brainfood.com - 214-720-0700 x 315