[Haskell-cafe] consulting and contracting
paul at cogito.org.uk
Tue Dec 15 16:59:48 EST 2009
On 15/12/09 21:19, Anton van Straaten wrote:
> Without that advocacy, this client would have used Java by default.
> As it was, the first of those two systems was developed in parallel
> with a Java version, and we used the two versions to verify each
> other's results. For the second system, a Java version wasn't deemed
> necessary, partly because the comparison succeeded in making Haskell's
> advantages sufficiently clear.
Can you give us some more details on this dual-language project? I'm
trying to collect objective evidence of the relative advantages of
Haskell and Java (or any other languages) and this kind of comparison is
gold dust. Very few companies are prepared to develop the same system
SLOC counts are good objective evidence (preferably from a standard SLOC
counter such as http://www.dwheeler.com/sloccount/). Days of effort in
development and defect counts are also powerful (although more subject
to random noise: give several developers the same job and developer
effort seems to vary even more than SLOC). Also any specific anecdotes
about changed requirements, defects discovered by QuickCheck can also be
useful. They are not objective evidence, but people listen to stories
more readily than statistics.
Of course if you can reveal the client's name that would also be very
useful, for the same reason. But I understand that may not be possible.
More information about the Haskell-Cafe