in reply to Short routines matter more in OO?
You've hit on a form of sample-related bias that research to determine "optimal" often falls prey to. The bias enters by way of an unstated assumption that the population that the sample is drawn from won't shift or change its nature.
The studies McConnell cites were done while object-oriented approaches where still taking hold. Their "sample" was procedural code written in the language of the day. At best, that was C, and I'll bet it included a lot of Fortran and COBOL. But in the following two decades, the "population" shifted. Were those studies to be done again today, I'll bet they would come up with very different answers about what "optimal" is. And if you were to do the studies again in 20 years, the answers might be different again.
|
---|
Replies are listed 'Best First'. | |
---|---|
Re: Re: Short routines matter more in OO?
by tilly (Archbishop) on Oct 13, 2003 at 14:41 UTC | |
by Elian (Parson) on Oct 13, 2003 at 15:07 UTC | |
Re: Re: Short routines matter more in OO?
by zby (Vicar) on Oct 13, 2003 at 08:36 UTC |