Re: FORTH levels
- From: Bruce McFarling <agila61@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 14:56:36 -0800 (PST)
On Mar 3, 8:56 am, Jonah Thomas <jethom...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Design has always been a craft. But it's expensive, and naturally people
want to automate that too. ... But it's only worth it to automate
choices that a lot of people will make. If you spend extra effort
making it smooth to do a choice that will be made only once, your
effort is wasted.
And its also the case that "productivity" in the sense used above
depends on the balance between the cost of the extra work for fine-
tuning a design to a particular problem and the cost of the wastage
involved in using a one-size-fits-many design solution.
In the example Guy Macon raises, the total cost of even what looks
like a negligable wastage per unit can be tremendous, due to the
number of units.
In the terrain of open source programming communities, the reason some
people are in the community is for the ability to custom-fit the
original design to a particular problem. However, any advantage Forth
may have in respect to that is purely notional without the actual open
source codebase to start from.
.
- References:
- Re: FORTH levels
- From: Jonah Thomas
- Re: FORTH levels
- Prev by Date: Re: FORTH levels
- Next by Date: Re: FORTH levels
- Previous by thread: Re: FORTH levels
- Next by thread: Maybe a newbie question..
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|