[squeak-dev] Technical "Debt" of Smalltalk with Moose? (was Re: An
Improvement Over its Successors)
janko.mivsek at eranova.si
Thu Dec 15 11:04:47 UTC 2011
I'm wondering if we can produce the same comparison of Technical Debt
with Moose technology comparing Smalltalk with Java, .NET and others, as
in study below?
>From study: Technical debt is highest in Java-EE, .NET second.
Technical Debt represents the effort required to fix problems that
remain in the code when an application is released.
It is shown as cost per LOC. This year is by their study 3.61 USD in
S, Janko Mivšek piše:
> S, Casey Ransberger piše:
>> I read recently that a study done on enterprise apps written in many different languages found the most defects per capita in Java apps. This didn't come as a surprise, but what did: the apps with the lowest defect rates were written in COBOL.
> This study can be found here (registration needed):
> The CRASH Report - 2011/12
> (CAST Report on Application Software Health)
> Interesting read, recommended, findings can help improve our software too!
>> The researchers seemed to scratch their heads and proclaim "...well, I guess there've been people grinding bugs off of the COBOL code for thirty years."
>> After the horror stories that I read about on comp.lang.cobol (I have strange hobbies? Also, some of those COBOL guys have a lot to teach) I think I nearly fell out of my chair laughing and achieved something approaching enlightenment;)
Smalltalk Web Application Server
More information about the Squeak-dev