Counting Lines of Code - was Job Accounting

[Jon.Paris@xxxxxxxxxx]

 >> When Micro$oft and IBM were collaborating on OS/2, supposedly the IBM people
got very annoyed with the Micro$oft programmers for trying to make the programs
shorter because fewer lines of code meant lower productivity.

I doubt that very much.  IBM's method for determining programmer productivity is
not a strict count but also involves a factor (can't recall what it's called)
that normalizes the count based on the "power" of the language.

If anything I'd say the story was backwards. One of the reasons that IBM had
major problems (and in the end abandoned) trying to port OS/2 to the Power PC
platform was due to the fact that MS had insisted on coding all of their
components in assembler rather than the C/C++ the IBM developers were using.
That obviously was OK moving from one Intel box to another but to Power PC
.........


+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---