Mailing-List: contact users-help@tomcat.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Tomcat Users List" <users@tomcat.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of edsonrichter@hotmail.com
 designates 65.55.111.95 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <BLU0-SMTP355D50BEC66E09828B4A773CF090@phx.gbl>
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 13:55:24 -0200
From: Edson Richter <edsonrichter@hotmail.com>
Organization: Simkorp =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Inform=E1tica_Ltda?=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64;
 rv:17.0) Gecko/20130107 Thunderbird/17.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: users@tomcat.apache.org
Subject: Re: Build vs. buy (Was: [Seriously OT] Help in diagnosing server
 unresponsiveness)
References: <511845C6.7080001@christopherschultz.net>
 <511A6165.2070006@christopherschultz.net>
In-Reply-To: <511A6165.2070006@christopherschultz.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Em 12/02/2013 13:36, Christopher Schultz escreveu:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
>
>> On 2/11/13 4:30 PM, Terence M. Bandoian wrote:
>>
>> I understand the considerations above and they are a part of the
>> prevailing thinking. However, one underlying assumption of the
>> supporting argument appears to be that today's programmers are not
>> capable of developing maintainable code which I don't believe is
>> true. As I understand it, programmer productivity is one of the
>> most significant factors in the decision making process and it is a
>> valid concern. IF (that's a big if) an application can be developed
>> in half the time using a generalized solution, then that approach
>> has to be considered along with a host of other concerns including
>> the end product and the effect on the organization. I say reliance
>> on generalized solutions is short-sighted because knowledge of the
>> underlying technologies is lost, or never gained, along with the
>> skills to work in those spheres.
> Are you suggesting that people who program using Java are oblivious to
> the innards of hardware architecture and are remain ignorant of these
> important details? That's the logical conclusion to your argument.
>
> I'm not saying you're wrong, but you have to admit that a Java
> programmer (of which I'm one) saying that using a generalized solution
> makes you ignorant is a bit like the pot calling the kettle black.
>
>> Efficiency, flexibility, repairability, extensibility and
>> reliability are all components of software quality and all are
>> affected by complexity. Less complex systems are easier to
>> maintain.
>>
>> To continue the aside, wasted energy is wasted energy and it may
>> become a factor in software development at some point. I think
>> decision makers should be taught that there is more to the bottom
>> line than dollars and cents.
> In my experience, by far the biggest time waster is trying to deal
> with code that is (or has become) unmaintainable. Re-writing just
> because a piece of code has become out-of-touch with current standards
> or because nobody understands how it works is entirely wasted effort.
> We have lots of places in our code where we have been spending -
> literally - years recording from bad decisions in the past.

Most companies are based on believes of the past: development is costly 
and non profitable. While this is true for small companies (where each 
employee salary present a risk for the profitability), for medium to big 
companies this is not true anymore.
The cost for constraining the company to software produced by big 
players (I wont cite names) is much bigger than having a (well 
organized) development team capable of integrating standards (like 
accounting and taxes) to the wild (sales, production, research).
Using libraries like JPA cannot be considered a danger unless used 
without proper analysis. This is true for everything in life (even water 
consumed in excess cause damage to health).
I do use JPA in the development of high performance applications, and I 
do sacrifice some nanoseconds in prol of well maintainable code - for 
the user, anything below 200ms will look instantaneous.
This makes my company profitable where my customers failed when working 
in house.
I hope they never learn how to do that, because this guarantees my money 
at the end of each month.

Edson Richter


>
> - -chris
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.17 (Darwin)
> Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
>
> iEYEAREIAAYFAlEaYWUACgkQ9CaO5/Lv0PC0CQCfX91lU8Tbik1CDe3g8ASV6pxQ
> rOkAn2PPdBNrP4rVPRJ6GWzXqFx/8HyQ
> =hcps
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tomcat.apache.org
>
>
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tomcat.apache.org