[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software
Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

comp.lang.ruby

Blah-Blah List (and why line counts are a bad metric

Ben Giddings

3/30/2005 3:07:00 AM

So, I did a search for Ruby on Rails today, and my interest was piqued
by the third result. It said "Move over Ruby on Rails, Java can be
concise too"

http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?threa...

That page makes the claim "After solving all the problems and adding a
number of missing features, the entire application is only 300 lines
longer (a 50% increase) and the server tier took not more than 2 days
to write."

I don't know where to find the Ta-Da list source code, but I found some
source for Bla-Bla List. I thought you people might get a chuckle
about the "concise" Java code, and the meaninglessness of line number
counts:

https://svn.rifers.org/blablalist/trunk/src/java/blabl...
Account.java

Ben
14 Answers

Hal E. Fulton

3/30/2005 3:19:00 AM

0

Ben Giddings wrote:
> So, I did a search for Ruby on Rails today, and my interest was piqued
> by the third result. It said "Move over Ruby on Rails, Java can be
> concise too"
>
> http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?threa...
>
> That page makes the claim "After solving all the problems and adding a
> number of missing features, the entire application is only 300 lines
> longer (a 50% increase) and the server tier took not more than 2 days
> to write."
>
> I don't know where to find the Ta-Da list source code, but I found some
> source for Bla-Bla List. I thought you people might get a chuckle
> about the "concise" Java code, and the meaninglessness of line number
> counts:
>
> https://svn.rifers.org/blablalist/trunk/src/java/blabl...
> Account.java

A chuckle? Call it a belly laugh followed by a small tear in the
corner of one eye...

I don't think Rails has anything to fear from... "Jails," shall we
call it? Java in Jails? (Don't drop the creamer!)

Besides which each one of those files has to be compiled anytime
anything changes. Gotta love an interpreted language that *has* to
be compiled first...


Hal

james_b

3/30/2005 4:14:00 AM

0

Ben Giddings wrote:
> So, I did a search for Ruby on Rails today, and my interest was piqued
> by the third result. It said "Move over Ruby on Rails, Java can be
> concise too"
>
> http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?threa...
>
> That page makes the claim "After solving all the problems and adding a
> number of missing features, the entire application is only 300 lines
> longer (a 50% increase) and the server tier took not more than 2 days
> to write."
>
> I don't know where to find the Ta-Da list source code, but I found some
> source for Bla-Bla List. I thought you people might get a chuckle
> about the "concise" Java code, and the meaninglessness of line number
> counts:


I have a (probably unrealistic) hope that the Rails/Java sniping can be
kept to the assorted blogs; threads here consisting largely of "My
toolkit can beat up your toolkit" are, at best, only preaching to the choir.


James

Hal E. Fulton

3/30/2005 4:38:00 AM

0

James Britt wrote:
>
> I have a (probably unrealistic) hope that the Rails/Java sniping can be
> kept to the assorted blogs; threads here consisting largely of "My
> toolkit can beat up your toolkit" are, at best, only preaching to the
> choir.
>

It doesn't bother me greatly as long as it's not cross-posted.

Hal

Nikolai Weibull

3/30/2005 9:40:00 AM

0

* Ben Giddings (Mar 30, 2005 10:30):
> https://svn.rifers.org/blablalist/trunk/src/java/blabl...

Not to mention all the xml-files that seem to litter this project tree.

What is worse, there's a whole lot of Flash going on in that
application, which I bet hasn't been included in the line-count. It
also means that the actual interface isn't as accessible as it could be.

Why the hell do people still use Flash?,
nikolai

--
::: name: Nikolai Weibull :: aliases: pcp / lone-star / aka :::
::: born: Chicago, IL USA :: loc atm: Gothenburg, Sweden :::
::: page: minimalistic.org :: fun atm: gf,lps,ruby,lisp,war3 :::
main(){printf(&linux["\021%six\012\0"],(linux)["have"]+"fun"-97);}

Stephen Kellett

3/30/2005 10:16:00 AM

0

In message <b2953594c06b49e96baa456fddf10eed@infofiend.com>, Ben
Giddings <bg-rubytalk@infofiend.com> writes
>https://svn.rifers.org/blablalist/trunk/src/java/blabl...
>Account.java

I got a security warning visiting this site. Using Firefox 1.0 on W2K.
Didn't continue to visit the site.

Stephen
--
Stephen Kellett
Object Media Limited http://www.objmedia.d...
RSI Information: http://www.objmedia.d.../rsi.html

Christian Neukirchen

3/30/2005 12:36:00 PM

0

Ben Giddings <bg-rubytalk@infofiend.com> writes:

> So, I did a search for Ruby on Rails today, and my interest was piqued
> by the third result. It said "Move over Ruby on Rails, Java can be
> concise too"
>
> http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?threa...
>
> That page makes the claim "After solving all the problems and adding a
> number of missing features, the entire application is only 300 lines
> longer (a 50% increase) and the server tier took not more than 2 days
> to write."
>
> I don't know where to find the Ta-Da list source code, but I found
> some source for Bla-Bla List. I thought you people might get a
> chuckle about the "concise" Java code, and the meaninglessness of
> line number counts:
>
> https://svn.rifers.org/blablalist/trunk/src/java/blabl...
> Account.java
>
> Ben

At first I thought, "wow for Java(!) this is really concise... only 10
files or something!" But then, I noticed I missed one entire level of
hierarchy, and there was what I had expected:
https://svn.rifers.org/blablalist/trunk/src/...

:-)

--
Christian Neukirchen <chneukirchen@gmail.com> http://chneuk...

Navindra Umanee

3/30/2005 1:32:00 PM

0

Stephen Kellett <snail@objmedia.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <b2953594c06b49e96baa456fddf10eed@infofiend.com>, Ben
> Giddings <bg-rubytalk@infofiend.com> writes
> >https://svn.rifers.org/blablalist/trunk/src/java/blabl...
> >Account.java
>
> I got a security warning visiting this site. Using Firefox 1.0 on W2K.
> Didn't continue to visit the site.

Firefox is being a bit stupid. It's just a Java source file, not even
compiled and certainly not executable.

Firefox is just getting confused by the SSL stuff which is totally
pointless in this context.

Cheers,
Navin.

Peter Reilly

3/30/2005 1:38:00 PM

0

Navindra Umanee wrote:

>Stephen Kellett <snail@objmedia.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
>>In message <b2953594c06b49e96baa456fddf10eed@infofiend.com>, Ben
>>Giddings <bg-rubytalk@infofiend.com> writes
>>
>>
>>>https://svn.rifers.org/blablalist/trunk/src/java/blabl...
>>>Account.java
>>>
>>>
>>I got a security warning visiting this site. Using Firefox 1.0 on W2K.
>>Didn't continue to visit the site.
>>
>>
>
>Firefox is being a bit stupid. It's just a Java source file, not even
>compiled and certainly not executable.
>
>Firefox is just getting confused by the SSL stuff which is totally
>pointless in this context.
>
>
The site is an https site with an unthrusted certifiate, which firefox
kindly informs
you about.

Peter


>Cheers,
>Navin.
>
>
>
>
>
>

kim kubik

3/30/2005 6:57:00 PM

0


"Hal Fulton"wrote ...
> Ben Giddings wrote:
I thought you people might get a chuckle
> > about the "concise" Java code, and . . .
> > https://svn.rifers.org/blablalist/trunk/src/java/blabl...
>
> A chuckle? Call it a belly laugh followed by a small tear in the
> corner of one eye...
>
> Hal
-------------------------
Want a REAL laugh? look here:

http://www.stunnix.com/prod/po/over...

I thought it was an April Fool's joke, but dunno . . .

Michael Campbell

3/30/2005 10:52:00 PM

0

On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 03:59:45 +0900, kim kubik <chaotrope@jps.net> wrote:
> Want a REAL laugh? look here:
>
> http://www.stunnix.com/prod/po/over...
>
> I thought it was an April Fool's joke, but dunno . . .


Very much perl code can be considered obfuscated by running it through
"cat", no? ;-)