[Shootout-list] hackers vs. PHBs

[Brandon J. Van Every]

Brent Fulgham wrote:
> > Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
> > ...deleted
> >> I think the 'main, frontlined' composite score should obey
> the Least
> >> Common Denominator of all the languages.  It should not include any
> >> tests for language-specific features, like garbage collection or
> >> concurrency or thread locking or big integers or whatever.
>  I mean,
> >> why
> >> should C++ be penalized just because Erlang has some great
> >> concurrency
> >> stuff in it?  I'm not personally writing a concurrent
> application, I
> >> don't care.
>
> Then don't include the tests you don't like in your scoring
> selections
> (in the Scorecard page).
> I assure you that you can manipulate the weights in such a way that
> you can make C++ win
> over everyone else.  The Shootout is very flexible this way.

Here we have a fundamental difference of philosophy.  You think the
shootout is about each 'hacker' having a 'fun time' evaluating languages
according to personal preference.  I think the Shootout is about 'PHBs'
looking up 'winning scores' to decide whether to approve the use of some
newfangled language.  The latter goal requires consistency.  Managers
don't sit around customizing stuff, they look at the marketing numbers
and say, "Ok, that's a winner."

We should be conditioning the major categories of comparison that people
use.

Viewperf would not have any utility in industry if there were no scoring
standards.


Cheers,                         www.indiegamedesign.com
Brandon Van Every               Seattle, WA

20% of the world is real.
80% is gobbledygook we make up inside our own heads.