Newsgroups: alt.lang.design,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.lisp
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!udel!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!vrotney
From: vrotney@netcom.com (William Paul Vrotney)
Subject: Re: Comparing productivity: LisP against C++ (was Re: Reference Counting)
In-Reply-To: karl@bagpuss.demon.co.uk's message of 13 Jan 1995 01:04:15 GMT
Message-ID: <vrotneyD2C7LF.GEI@netcom.com>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <19941203T221402Z.enag@naggum.no> <LGM.94Dec5075553@polaris.ih.att.com>
	<D0CLt9.6K3@research.att.com> <BUFF.94Dec15103904@pravda.world>
	<D0xAIp.3Dn@rheged.dircon.co.uk> <vrotneyD11MDv.Ks7@netcom.com> <KARL.95Jan13010415@bagpuss.demon.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 1995 09:27:15 GMT
Lines: 37
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.lang.c++:107261 comp.lang.lisp:16362

In article <KARL.95Jan13010415@bagpuss.demon.co.uk> karl@bagpuss.demon.co.uk (Karl Strickland) writes:
>
>   In article <vrotneyD11MDv.Ks7@netcom.com> vrotney@netcom.com (William Paul Vrotney) writes:
>   >  This leads me to believe that for a complex enough application, like a Go
>   >  program, it is better to develop it in Lisp then recode in C++ in the last
>   >  two weeks before delivery.
>
>   You could port a 'complex enough' application to another language and fully test
>   it, enough to have the confidence to deliver in just two weeks?  Wow...
>   --

See, that's the trouble with putting things into text.  Now if this was
verbal I could come back with -- what I said was "the last FEW weeks before
delivery". :-)

But seriously, once you have the data structures and algorithm down pat the
translation is pretty fast and bug free.  OF COURSE, this whole idea hinges
on having a Lispy C++ library that is bug free and not doing anything too
exotic in Lisp in the first place.

Please allow me some exaggeration here to make a point.  Which is the idea of
using two languages for an application, a fast prototyping VHL language to
develop the algorithm then an efficient language to deliver the application.
I personally believe that this is the way to go (for the time being) for
complex or difficult applications.  My problem is convincing a manager that
this method is cost effective.

In the case of my Go program the payoff is clear.  Since I have been
developing it for 20 years now, even if it took me 1 whole year to make a
port to C++ the savings would be worth it to me.  By the way, in those 20
years the Go program was first in a few assembly languages, then in FORTRAN
then in Pascal then in Lisp, if you were wondering.

Well, ok, maybe the last two months before delivery.

-- 
William P. Vrotney - vrotney@netcom.com
