Newsgroups: alt.lang.design,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.lisp
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!hookup!newshost.marcam.com!uunet!mole-end!mat
From: mat@mole-end.matawan.nj.us
Subject: Re: Comparing productivity: LisP against C++ (was Re: Reference Counting)
Message-ID: <1994Dec22.174958.13815@mole-end.matawan.nj.us>
Summary: Evolvability implies reusability
Organization: :
References: <19941203T221402Z.enag@naggum.no> <BUFF.94Dec15103904@pravda.world> <LGM.94Dec21090132@polaris.ih.att.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 1994 17:49:58 GMT
Lines: 15
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.lang.c++:104661 comp.lang.lisp:16168

In article <LGM.94Dec21090132@polaris.ih.att.com>, lgm@polaris.ih.att.com (Lawrence G. Mayka) writes:
> In article <3d6mmd$r1q@transfer.stratus.com> det@sw.stratus.com (Dave Toland) writes:
> 
>    In addition to initial implementation, what about maintainability?  Which
>    language is more reliably modified when the requirements evolve?
> 
> I certainly agree that =evolvability= is perhaps the most important
> characteristic of a large application nowadays.  ...

The first reuse of code in Version N is as the base of Version N + 1 .
-- 
 (This man's opinions are his own.)
 From mole-end				Mark Terribile
 mat@mole-end.matawan.nj.us, Somewhere in Matawan, NJ
	(Training and consulting in C, C++, UNIX, etc.)
