Newsgroups: comp.lang.smalltalk
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!godot.cc.duq.edu!newsgate.duke.edu!news.mathworks.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!n3ott.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!n1ott.istar!uniserve!news.sol.net!newspump.sol.net!spool.mu.edu!munnari.OZ.AU!news.mel.connect.com.au!news.syd.connect.com.au!warrane.connect.com.au!assip.csasyd!news
From: donh@syd.csa.com.au (Don Harrison)
Subject: Re: Function Point Counts in Smalltalk
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: dev11
Message-ID: <Ds5B5u.F4I@assip.csasyd.oz>
Sender: news@assip.csasyd.oz
Reply-To: donh@syd.csa.com.au
Organization: CSC Australia
References: <4oe7vt$7hu@hasle.sn.no>
Date: Wed, 29 May 1996 02:34:42 GMT
Lines: 44

Arne D Halvorsen writes:

:<Clambering onto soapbox>
:
:Function points ?  Rewarding programmers for adding complexity ?
:
:What you should do,  is: contract with your programmers that they will
:deliver such and such functionality at a given time, for a given
:price. 
:
:Then *deduct*  money for each function point added (or for each line
:of code or something like that).
:
:Smalltalk programmers should be paid for every line of (production)
:code that they refrain from writing, while still being able to
:deliver.
:
:<Getting down from soapbox, wiping brow>

Well said. Good for fixed price contracts. What about a payment sheme for 
time-and-materials contracts? How about a formula like:

  $ = K * f * r / t

where

  $ = your favourite currency
  K = some appropriate constant
  f = amount of additional functionality (measured somehow)
  r = reused code as a percentage of total code for additional functionality
  t = time taken?

:Ahhh that felt good,

I bet it did!

:Arne

-- 
Don.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Don Harrison             donh@syd.csa.com.au


